The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Civics 101
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From YouGov, the percentages of people who correctly identified the current unemployment rate and some rudimentary facts about the three branches of the US federal government. By sex:

By race:

The potential responses to these questions were presented in a multiple-choice format. The unemployment question had five possible answers. Respondents could also cop to not knowing the answer. Among blacks, 28% admitted not knowing. Of the remaining 72%, some 15% will have selected the correct answer by guessing. Given that 19% of the black sample answered the question correctly, somewhere in the vicinity of 4% of black respondents confidently know what the official unemployment rate is. That’s not intended to mock them for not knowing–it’s a nearly useless number, after all. But it is, you know, the thing Donald Trump keeps celebrating in an attempt to shore up his black support:

By partisan affiliation:

As is always the case, the ignorant–in the literal sense of the word–mostly identify as belonging to the squishy middle.

 
Hide 118 CommentsLeave a Comment
118 Comments to "Civics 101"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. The resumption of the “literacy test” for the franchise would be a certain sleight of hand to keep an ossified GOP legacy majority in power.

    • Replies: @iffen
    And would confirm the accusation by SJWs that Republicans are trying to keep POC from voting just like in the old days.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    In an increasingly totalitarian age like ours, it is laudable that an organization like YouGov will admit that white men are the most knowledgeable people in America. Even something as obvious as that is increasingly perceived as a Hatefact which cannot be alluded to, let alone explicitly stated.
  2. A couple of things here, A.E.:

    On the unemployment rate, I doubt I’d answer correctly because I don’t believe official numbers, on this and inflation, so I don’t have the BLS numbers in my head (for a reason). I don’t bring this up as the reason for bad responses by most of these groups though.

    On the 5 answers for the questions, this can be very tricky. For some real number like unemployment rate, would they make a good question with answers like: a) 8%,? Or would they have: a) 4.3%. b) 4.8%. c) 5%. d) 5.2 % e) 5.3%. In the latter case, unless you follow this stuff like a wonk (and it changes monthly) a very good commonsense guess won’t help you at all.

    I bring this up because the old written test for a driver’s license had lots of this stupidity: “Do you put your signal on a) 200 ft. b) 175 ft. c) 150 ft. or d) 125 ft. from the intersection?” Unless one had memorized the booklet, commonsense wouldn’t help. Hell, people ought to be glad you turned on your signal at all! Multiple choice questions can be made stupidly if not much thought is put into the answers.

    Now, on the SCROTUS, the number 9 ought just to be known, and I’d put the 2 length-of-term questions as just as easy, the number of Senators as the next simplest thing to know. House members would be next – I would totally understand anyone who didn’t follow election coverage as a hobby not knowing that. The yes/no questions are obviously hard to make stupid like one can for an integer-answer or real-number-answer question.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    I don't know how that comment got munged up here. In the 2nd paragraph, I'd put my first example as 5 ranges Damn, it did it again! Some kind of unz-created spam killer, I guess. [I really don't how that got messed up - never mind, it was not a fluke. In 5-minute EDIT mode right now]* Anyway this first example is that of a fair set of answers (or one could widen the higher ranges just to demonstrate an answer that proves the test-taker has no clue)

    I hope that makes my point clearer. Making GOOD (as in getting at the level of knowledge) and FAIR multiple choice questions is absolutely not an easy thing. Having students work out problems and hand grading (this is for math/engineering) is much more fair. However, the former is a breeze for grading, while the latter is a bear. See Peak Stupidity on making a fair multiple-choice test.

    It's not just the number ranges, but also "none of the above"s and "all of the aboves". Sometimes, the test-taker may know some detail that the test-maker is making an assumption on. Often, a smart student will have to figure out the mindset of the test-maker to get certain questions right. This is really OT now, but what the hell, it sucks.

    .

    * 1st answer was less than 2%
    2nd was between 2 and 4
    3rd was between 4 and 6
    4th was between 6 and 8
    5th was greater than 8 %

  3. Also, I’m kind of surprised the number in general are THIS HIGH, really. It’s better than what I expected. Now, if there were numbers for immigrants vs. native Americans, I would really like to see that. Per my experience, the civics involved in becoming a citizen is a joke. One can cram for this test like any other, and certain people are very good at this.

    Most of our new immigrants over the last 5 decades are not the kind of people who care about knowing the terms of the members of the House and Senate. It’s just not in them – see Peak Stupidity on Citizenship in the Nation.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Around 10-15 points can be shaved off of all the bars to approximate actual knowledge, since that's about the percentage of people who will get each question correct by simply guessing.
  4. The first chart…..it appears that the knowledge level of women, in aggregate, appears to be exactly 77% of that of men.

    Hence, that means that payscales in the real economy are working in perfect accordance with aptitude.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    Hence, that means that payscales in the real economy are working in perfect accordance with aptitude.
     
    Is this a joke?

    Anyway, I would be curious to see the numbers by age as well as race and sex. Older women grew up in an era when caring about politics was "unladylike." I would expect the gap to narrow as you move into lower age cohorts.

    To tell the truth, but for the ongoing immivasion ignored and enabled by
    the swamp, I probably wouldn't pay nearly as much attention to politics as I do. It's been a long time since we've been able to talk about anything interesting.
    , @L Woods
    Funny, but the 77/100 pay gap is actually evidence of gross discrimination against men.
  5. Bad survey. 5%, 6%, 7%, 8% unemployment is a fairly meaningless and a fake stat anyway. If the choices were 3 points apart, then yes perhaps this signals something.

    Your conclusions and the directional indicators are sound, but this is a trash survey.

  6. The only way Republicans win is to strip the Dem party of its white males. Shame they don’t have the cajones to actively woo them: Fortunate for the Repubes, the non-white-male Democrats are chasing white males away.

    • Replies: @indocon
    Except those who are gay, jew, and atheists. That still leaves something like 10%-12% of the electorate.
  7. @Thomm
    The first chart.....it appears that the knowledge level of women, in aggregate, appears to be exactly 77% of that of men.

    Hence, that means that payscales in the real economy are working in perfect accordance with aptitude.

    Hence, that means that payscales in the real economy are working in perfect accordance with aptitude.

    Is this a joke?

    Anyway, I would be curious to see the numbers by age as well as race and sex. Older women grew up in an era when caring about politics was “unladylike.” I would expect the gap to narrow as you move into lower age cohorts.

    To tell the truth, but for the ongoing immivasion ignored and enabled by
    the swamp, I probably wouldn’t pay nearly as much attention to politics as I do. It’s been a long time since we’ve been able to talk about anything interesting.

    • Replies: @Thomm

    Is this a joke?
     
    Women are innately less productive than men, and hence are rightfully paid less. This is despite the massive affirmative action that women get.

    Older women grew up in an era when caring about politics was “unladylike.”
     
    It is not 1990 anymore. It is 2019. That means that women born in 1969 are 50 years old. What you said has not been true for a long time.
  8. The only way Republicans win is to strip the Dem party of its white males. Shame they don’t have the cajones to actively woo them: Fortunate for the Repubes, the non-white-male Democrats are chasing white males away.

    Aren’t white men less than 30% of the electorate. You’re going to get nowhere with that. The Sailer strategy doesn’t work without White women.

    Come to think of it, is there ever a point where the dissident right finally settles on a political strategy and starts, you know, doing something rather than sitting around thinking of reasons to insult various groups of White people?

    Political correctness obviously offends our huwhite sense of fair play, but the fact of the matter is that the Left gets shit done. The right likes to fantasize about “circular firing squads” among the “coalition of the fringes,” the implicit claim being that the (mostly white) right is more unified, stable, and durable. However, the sad fact of the matter is that far and away the most vicious circular firing squad is here on the dissident right, abetted by worms like “Thomm” and certain others around here I won’t mention by name. As long as that continues, nothing whatsoever will change.

    But hey, at least we can pat ourselves on the back for respecting free speech while White America circles the drain.

    • Replies: @iffen
    and certain others around here I won’t mention by name.

    Thanks
    , @indocon
    There still are enough straight and somewhat religious white males to make a difference, problem is that they will be very educated and high up on income ladder. There really has to be a race and gender based consolidation to get them. The bigger problem with them is that they maybe be concentrated in places like MA/NY/VA/CA where on Presidential level it makes no difference.
    , @Adam Smith

    "but the fact of the matter is that the Left gets shit done."
     
    This is why democrats are more dangerous than republicans.
    (not that democrats are actually left of center or more corrupt than republicans)

    Democrats are significantly more capable and have much better PR.
    They're generally smarter too. As the Saker says, stupid can be good.

    When the republicans gain symbolic power the democrats will put on their pussyhats™, march in a circle and show us what democracy looks like.

    Viva la resistance!

    When a democrat starts a new war for Israel or drones civilians on the kill list democrats mostly don't notice. They certainly don't care.

    The ones who do notice love it. Democrats love war, provided a democrat starts it.
  9. @216
    The resumption of the "literacy test" for the franchise would be a certain sleight of hand to keep an ossified GOP legacy majority in power.

    And would confirm the accusation by SJWs that Republicans are trying to keep POC from voting just like in the old days.

  10. @Rosie

    The only way Republicans win is to strip the Dem party of its white males. Shame they don’t have the cajones to actively woo them: Fortunate for the Repubes, the non-white-male Democrats are chasing white males away.
     
    Aren't white men less than 30% of the electorate. You're going to get nowhere with that. The Sailer strategy doesn't work without White women.

    Come to think of it, is there ever a point where the dissident right finally settles on a political strategy and starts, you know, doing something rather than sitting around thinking of reasons to insult various groups of White people?

    Political correctness obviously offends our huwhite sense of fair play, but the fact of the matter is that the Left gets shit done. The right likes to fantasize about "circular firing squads" among the "coalition of the fringes," the implicit claim being that the (mostly white) right is more unified, stable, and durable. However, the sad fact of the matter is that far and away the most vicious circular firing squad is here on the dissident right, abetted by worms like "Thomm" and certain others around here I won't mention by name. As long as that continues, nothing whatsoever will change.

    But hey, at least we can pat ourselves on the back for respecting free speech while White America circles the drain.

    and certain others around here I won’t mention by name.

    Thanks

    • LOL: Rosie
  11. @216
    The resumption of the "literacy test" for the franchise would be a certain sleight of hand to keep an ossified GOP legacy majority in power.

    In an increasingly totalitarian age like ours, it is laudable that an organization like YouGov will admit that white men are the most knowledgeable people in America. Even something as obvious as that is increasingly perceived as a Hatefact which cannot be alluded to, let alone explicitly stated.

    • Replies: @iffen
    Even something as obvious as that is increasingly perceived as a Hatefact which cannot be alluded to, let alone explicitly stated.

    How much longer will these dating sites be allowing to release preference data?

    The RQ will end up like the JQ. Just asking if there is a question will be grounds for suspicion.

  12. @Achmed E. Newman
    Also, I'm kind of surprised the number in general are THIS HIGH, really. It's better than what I expected. Now, if there were numbers for immigrants vs. native Americans, I would really like to see that. Per my experience, the civics involved in becoming a citizen is a joke. One can cram for this test like any other, and certain people are very good at this.

    Most of our new immigrants over the last 5 decades are not the kind of people who care about knowing the terms of the members of the House and Senate. It's just not in them - see Peak Stupidity on Citizenship in the Nation.

    Around 10-15 points can be shaved off of all the bars to approximate actual knowledge, since that’s about the percentage of people who will get each question correct by simply guessing.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Oh, yeah, I had read that on the black numbers already. Good point.
  13. @Achmed E. Newman
    A couple of things here, A.E.:

    On the unemployment rate, I doubt I'd answer correctly because I don't believe official numbers, on this and inflation, so I don't have the BLS numbers in my head (for a reason). I don't bring this up as the reason for bad responses by most of these groups though.

    On the 5 answers for the questions, this can be very tricky. For some real number like unemployment rate, would they make a good question with answers like: a) 8%,? Or would they have: a) 4.3%. b) 4.8%. c) 5%. d) 5.2 % e) 5.3%. In the latter case, unless you follow this stuff like a wonk (and it changes monthly) a very good commonsense guess won't help you at all.

    I bring this up because the old written test for a driver's license had lots of this stupidity: "Do you put your signal on a) 200 ft. b) 175 ft. c) 150 ft. or d) 125 ft. from the intersection?" Unless one had memorized the booklet, commonsense wouldn't help. Hell, people ought to be glad you turned on your signal at all! Multiple choice questions can be made stupidly if not much thought is put into the answers.

    Now, on the SCROTUS, the number 9 ought just to be known, and I'd put the 2 length-of-term questions as just as easy, the number of Senators as the next simplest thing to know. House members would be next - I would totally understand anyone who didn't follow election coverage as a hobby not knowing that. The yes/no questions are obviously hard to make stupid like one can for an integer-answer or real-number-answer question.

    I don’t know how that comment got munged up here. In the 2nd paragraph, I’d put my first example as 5 ranges Damn, it did it again! Some kind of unz-created spam killer, I guess. [I really don’t how that got messed up – never mind, it was not a fluke. In 5-minute EDIT mode right now]* Anyway this first example is that of a fair set of answers (or one could widen the higher ranges just to demonstrate an answer that proves the test-taker has no clue)

    I hope that makes my point clearer. Making GOOD (as in getting at the level of knowledge) and FAIR multiple choice questions is absolutely not an easy thing. Having students work out problems and hand grading (this is for math/engineering) is much more fair. However, the former is a breeze for grading, while the latter is a bear. See Peak Stupidity on making a fair multiple-choice test.

    It’s not just the number ranges, but also “none of the above”s and “all of the aboves”. Sometimes, the test-taker may know some detail that the test-maker is making an assumption on. Often, a smart student will have to figure out the mindset of the test-maker to get certain questions right. This is really OT now, but what the hell, it sucks.

    .

    * 1st answer was less than 2%
    2nd was between 2 and 4
    3rd was between 4 and 6
    4th was between 6 and 8
    5th was greater than 8 %

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    I guess it was the less-than and greater-than signs at the beginning and end of my answer set that made it seem like a bad link to the software. Fair enough, I guess.
  14. @Achmed E. Newman
    I don't know how that comment got munged up here. In the 2nd paragraph, I'd put my first example as 5 ranges Damn, it did it again! Some kind of unz-created spam killer, I guess. [I really don't how that got messed up - never mind, it was not a fluke. In 5-minute EDIT mode right now]* Anyway this first example is that of a fair set of answers (or one could widen the higher ranges just to demonstrate an answer that proves the test-taker has no clue)

    I hope that makes my point clearer. Making GOOD (as in getting at the level of knowledge) and FAIR multiple choice questions is absolutely not an easy thing. Having students work out problems and hand grading (this is for math/engineering) is much more fair. However, the former is a breeze for grading, while the latter is a bear. See Peak Stupidity on making a fair multiple-choice test.

    It's not just the number ranges, but also "none of the above"s and "all of the aboves". Sometimes, the test-taker may know some detail that the test-maker is making an assumption on. Often, a smart student will have to figure out the mindset of the test-maker to get certain questions right. This is really OT now, but what the hell, it sucks.

    .

    * 1st answer was less than 2%
    2nd was between 2 and 4
    3rd was between 4 and 6
    4th was between 6 and 8
    5th was greater than 8 %

    I guess it was the less-than and greater-than signs at the beginning and end of my answer set that made it seem like a bad link to the software. Fair enough, I guess.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
    Try using &lt; for < and &gt; for >.
  15. @Audacious Epigone
    Around 10-15 points can be shaved off of all the bars to approximate actual knowledge, since that's about the percentage of people who will get each question correct by simply guessing.

    Oh, yeah, I had read that on the black numbers already. Good point.

  16. @Audacious Epigone
    In an increasingly totalitarian age like ours, it is laudable that an organization like YouGov will admit that white men are the most knowledgeable people in America. Even something as obvious as that is increasingly perceived as a Hatefact which cannot be alluded to, let alone explicitly stated.

    Even something as obvious as that is increasingly perceived as a Hatefact which cannot be alluded to, let alone explicitly stated.

    How much longer will these dating sites be allowing to release preference data?

    The RQ will end up like the JQ. Just asking if there is a question will be grounds for suspicion.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Yes, and it will happen as the glut of genetic information continues to pour in showing that differences in human populations are more than skin deep. How this plays out in the West is an open question.

    That China will lead the way, however, increasingly does not seem like a question at all to me but rather a statement of fact.
  17. @The Alarmist
    The only way Republicans win is to strip the Dem party of its white males. Shame they don't have the cajones to actively woo them: Fortunate for the Repubes, the non-white-male Democrats are chasing white males away.

    Except those who are gay, jew, and atheists. That still leaves something like 10%-12% of the electorate.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
    Gay: <3%
    Jew: <3%
    AA&OPoC: 30%, split 90/10 with Republicans, so 27%
    Athiests: IDK, 23% split 70/30 with Republicans, so 16%
    Allow -5% "diversification effect" for persons in multiple categories

    That leaves a solid core of dems roughly 44%, which is pretty close to reality. So, do the Dems really have any white males left to lose?
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Younger Jews are less leftist and more supportive of Trumpian populism than older Jews are. The generational differences are pretty stark. It does not seem obvious to me that Jews will remain overwhelmingly Democrat in the coming decades.
  18. @Rosie

    The only way Republicans win is to strip the Dem party of its white males. Shame they don’t have the cajones to actively woo them: Fortunate for the Repubes, the non-white-male Democrats are chasing white males away.
     
    Aren't white men less than 30% of the electorate. You're going to get nowhere with that. The Sailer strategy doesn't work without White women.

    Come to think of it, is there ever a point where the dissident right finally settles on a political strategy and starts, you know, doing something rather than sitting around thinking of reasons to insult various groups of White people?

    Political correctness obviously offends our huwhite sense of fair play, but the fact of the matter is that the Left gets shit done. The right likes to fantasize about "circular firing squads" among the "coalition of the fringes," the implicit claim being that the (mostly white) right is more unified, stable, and durable. However, the sad fact of the matter is that far and away the most vicious circular firing squad is here on the dissident right, abetted by worms like "Thomm" and certain others around here I won't mention by name. As long as that continues, nothing whatsoever will change.

    But hey, at least we can pat ourselves on the back for respecting free speech while White America circles the drain.

    There still are enough straight and somewhat religious white males to make a difference, problem is that they will be very educated and high up on income ladder. There really has to be a race and gender based consolidation to get them. The bigger problem with them is that they maybe be concentrated in places like MA/NY/VA/CA where on Presidential level it makes no difference.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    There really has to be a race and gender based consolidation to get them.
     
    I'm sure you're offering this advice with nothing but the best interests of White men in mind.

    In any event, then they will embrace their destruction. There is no way forward for White men without White women.
    , @Rosie
    I was curious, so I tried to figure out the percentage of total votes cast for Trump that came from White women. I came up with 35%, compared with about 43% from White men.

    To put that in perspective, about 32% of Hillary's total votes came from blacks and Hispanics combined. IOW, the White female vote was as crucial to the Trump coalition as NAMs are to the Democratic coalition, simply because there are more of us and we turn out.

    Now, these are back of the envelope calculations with lots of rounding and estimating, but anyone who wants to know can do more precise calculations.

    https://www.people-press.org/2018/08/09/an-examination-of-the-2016-electorate-based-on-validated-voters/

  19. @Rosie

    The only way Republicans win is to strip the Dem party of its white males. Shame they don’t have the cajones to actively woo them: Fortunate for the Repubes, the non-white-male Democrats are chasing white males away.
     
    Aren't white men less than 30% of the electorate. You're going to get nowhere with that. The Sailer strategy doesn't work without White women.

    Come to think of it, is there ever a point where the dissident right finally settles on a political strategy and starts, you know, doing something rather than sitting around thinking of reasons to insult various groups of White people?

    Political correctness obviously offends our huwhite sense of fair play, but the fact of the matter is that the Left gets shit done. The right likes to fantasize about "circular firing squads" among the "coalition of the fringes," the implicit claim being that the (mostly white) right is more unified, stable, and durable. However, the sad fact of the matter is that far and away the most vicious circular firing squad is here on the dissident right, abetted by worms like "Thomm" and certain others around here I won't mention by name. As long as that continues, nothing whatsoever will change.

    But hey, at least we can pat ourselves on the back for respecting free speech while White America circles the drain.

    “but the fact of the matter is that the Left gets shit done.”

    This is why democrats are more dangerous than republicans.
    (not that democrats are actually left of center or more corrupt than republicans)

    Democrats are significantly more capable and have much better PR.
    They’re generally smarter too. As the Saker says, stupid can be good.

    When the republicans gain symbolic power the democrats will put on their pussyhats™, march in a circle and show us what democracy looks like.

    Viva la resistance!

    When a democrat starts a new war for Israel or drones civilians on the kill list democrats mostly don’t notice. They certainly don’t care.

    The ones who do notice love it. Democrats love war, provided a democrat starts it.

  20. @indocon
    There still are enough straight and somewhat religious white males to make a difference, problem is that they will be very educated and high up on income ladder. There really has to be a race and gender based consolidation to get them. The bigger problem with them is that they maybe be concentrated in places like MA/NY/VA/CA where on Presidential level it makes no difference.

    There really has to be a race and gender based consolidation to get them.

    I’m sure you’re offering this advice with nothing but the best interests of White men in mind.

    In any event, then they will embrace their destruction. There is no way forward for White men without White women.

  21. @Rosie

    Hence, that means that payscales in the real economy are working in perfect accordance with aptitude.
     
    Is this a joke?

    Anyway, I would be curious to see the numbers by age as well as race and sex. Older women grew up in an era when caring about politics was "unladylike." I would expect the gap to narrow as you move into lower age cohorts.

    To tell the truth, but for the ongoing immivasion ignored and enabled by
    the swamp, I probably wouldn't pay nearly as much attention to politics as I do. It's been a long time since we've been able to talk about anything interesting.

    Is this a joke?

    Women are innately less productive than men, and hence are rightfully paid less. This is despite the massive affirmative action that women get.

    Older women grew up in an era when caring about politics was “unladylike.”

    It is not 1990 anymore. It is 2019. That means that women born in 1969 are 50 years old. What you said has not been true for a long time.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    Women are innately less productive than men, and hence are rightfully paid less. This is despite the massive affirmative action that women get.
     
    1. Women are not "innately less productive" than men, you creep. We just dedicate more of our time and energy to unpaid labor than men, even those of us who hold jobs. Now, whether it's fair to pay women less because of that is not a factual but a moral question, and a more complicated one than is typically recognized around here.

    2. We don't get "massive affirmative action" outside of a very few male-dominated fields that few of us work in anyway.


    It is not 1990 anymore. It is 2019. That means that women born in 1969 are 50 years old. What you said has not been true for a long time.
     
    You don't know what you're talking about. Gender stereotypes of this sort persisted until the early 90s, especially in the working and lower-middle classes. (I know. I was there.) Plus, you're not taking account of the relative size of the baby boomer generation. (Hint: There's a reason they're called "baby boomers.")

    Thomm, I think it's time you meddling subcons get your own punctuation. From now on, I'll call you {{{Thomm}}}.
  22. @Thomm

    Is this a joke?
     
    Women are innately less productive than men, and hence are rightfully paid less. This is despite the massive affirmative action that women get.

    Older women grew up in an era when caring about politics was “unladylike.”
     
    It is not 1990 anymore. It is 2019. That means that women born in 1969 are 50 years old. What you said has not been true for a long time.

    Women are innately less productive than men, and hence are rightfully paid less. This is despite the massive affirmative action that women get.

    1. Women are not “innately less productive” than men, you creep. We just dedicate more of our time and energy to unpaid labor than men, even those of us who hold jobs. Now, whether it’s fair to pay women less because of that is not a factual but a moral question, and a more complicated one than is typically recognized around here.

    2. We don’t get “massive affirmative action” outside of a very few male-dominated fields that few of us work in anyway.

    It is not 1990 anymore. It is 2019. That means that women born in 1969 are 50 years old. What you said has not been true for a long time.

    You don’t know what you’re talking about. Gender stereotypes of this sort persisted until the early 90s, especially in the working and lower-middle classes. (I know. I was there.) Plus, you’re not taking account of the relative size of the baby boomer generation. (Hint: There’s a reason they’re called “baby boomers.”)

    Thomm, I think it’s time you meddling subcons get your own punctuation. From now on, I’ll call you {{{Thomm}}}.

    • Replies: @Thomm

    We just dedicate more of our time and energy to unpaid labor than men,
     
    False. Women just count their housework, while ignoring what men do (such as mow the lawn, etc.).

    2. We don’t get “massive affirmative action” outside of a very few male-dominated fields that few of us work in anyway.

     

    Super False. California just passed a law that mandates all corporate boards be 40% female. Title IX dominates everything about college life. The women's soccer team is screeching that the law of supply and demand be repealed. Even Steve Sailer points this out repeatedly. A white woman gets vastly more affirmative action than a black man. Of course, black women get a two-fer.

    As with most things you say, you seem to be stuck in the 1969-1974 era.
  23. @Rosie

    Women are innately less productive than men, and hence are rightfully paid less. This is despite the massive affirmative action that women get.
     
    1. Women are not "innately less productive" than men, you creep. We just dedicate more of our time and energy to unpaid labor than men, even those of us who hold jobs. Now, whether it's fair to pay women less because of that is not a factual but a moral question, and a more complicated one than is typically recognized around here.

    2. We don't get "massive affirmative action" outside of a very few male-dominated fields that few of us work in anyway.


    It is not 1990 anymore. It is 2019. That means that women born in 1969 are 50 years old. What you said has not been true for a long time.
     
    You don't know what you're talking about. Gender stereotypes of this sort persisted until the early 90s, especially in the working and lower-middle classes. (I know. I was there.) Plus, you're not taking account of the relative size of the baby boomer generation. (Hint: There's a reason they're called "baby boomers.")

    Thomm, I think it's time you meddling subcons get your own punctuation. From now on, I'll call you {{{Thomm}}}.

    We just dedicate more of our time and energy to unpaid labor than men,

    False. Women just count their housework, while ignoring what men do (such as mow the lawn, etc.).

    2. We don’t get “massive affirmative action” outside of a very few male-dominated fields that few of us work in anyway.

    Super False. California just passed a law that mandates all corporate boards be 40% female. Title IX dominates everything about college life. The women’s soccer team is screeching that the law of supply and demand be repealed. Even Steve Sailer points this out repeatedly. A white woman gets vastly more affirmative action than a black man. Of course, black women get a two-fer.

    As with most things you say, you seem to be stuck in the 1969-1974 era.

    • Replies: @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

    As with most things you say, you seem to be stuck in the 1969-1974 era.

     

    This is exactly right.

    If Rosie were a Catholic, looking at the massive numbers of apostates, she'd probably tell us to just be patient and wait for the "fruits of the council."

    In any case, I don't know where she grew up, but her idea about politics recently being considered "unladylike" is a travesty. That died decades ago. Sadly.

    , @Rosie

    False. Women just count their housework, while ignoring what men do (such as mow the lawn, etc.).
     
    Childcare, stupid. Oh yeah, and then there's, you know, giving birth, pregnancy, nursing, all those things with which none of you would exist.

    A white woman gets vastly more affirmative action than a black man.
     

    That is absurd on its face. Black men can't even get into a decent college on their own chops. The racial gap on the SAT dwarfs the sex gap, and there is virtually no gap on the ACT.

    https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/09/07/act-scores-are-gaps-remain-preparation-and-raceethnicity


    California just passed a law that mandates all corporate boards be 40% female.
     
    Good. Maybe that's what it will take to make the corporations stop being so damned greedy. Never mind, the damage is done. White men have been very "productive" this past thirty years systematically exporting our industrial base to China et. al.
  24. @Thomm

    We just dedicate more of our time and energy to unpaid labor than men,
     
    False. Women just count their housework, while ignoring what men do (such as mow the lawn, etc.).

    2. We don’t get “massive affirmative action” outside of a very few male-dominated fields that few of us work in anyway.

     

    Super False. California just passed a law that mandates all corporate boards be 40% female. Title IX dominates everything about college life. The women's soccer team is screeching that the law of supply and demand be repealed. Even Steve Sailer points this out repeatedly. A white woman gets vastly more affirmative action than a black man. Of course, black women get a two-fer.

    As with most things you say, you seem to be stuck in the 1969-1974 era.

    As with most things you say, you seem to be stuck in the 1969-1974 era.

    This is exactly right.

    If Rosie were a Catholic, looking at the massive numbers of apostates, she’d probably tell us to just be patient and wait for the “fruits of the council.”

    In any case, I don’t know where she grew up, but her idea about politics recently being considered “unladylike” is a travesty. That died decades ago. Sadly.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    That died decades ago. Sadly.
     
    You're a moron. Otherwise, it would be obvious to you that there are still millions of women around who grew up with those stereotypes.
  25. @indocon
    Except those who are gay, jew, and atheists. That still leaves something like 10%-12% of the electorate.

    Gay: <3%
    Jew: <3%
    AA&OPoC: 30%, split 90/10 with Republicans, so 27%
    Athiests: IDK, 23% split 70/30 with Republicans, so 16%
    Allow -5% "diversification effect" for persons in multiple categories

    That leaves a solid core of dems roughly 44%, which is pretty close to reality. So, do the Dems really have any white males left to lose?

    • Replies: @indocon
    The Atheist 23% is way too high. My definition of an atheist is somebody who is as avowedly anti-christian, not someone who does not attend church regularly.
  26. @indocon
    There still are enough straight and somewhat religious white males to make a difference, problem is that they will be very educated and high up on income ladder. There really has to be a race and gender based consolidation to get them. The bigger problem with them is that they maybe be concentrated in places like MA/NY/VA/CA where on Presidential level it makes no difference.

    I was curious, so I tried to figure out the percentage of total votes cast for Trump that came from White women. I came up with 35%, compared with about 43% from White men.

    To put that in perspective, about 32% of Hillary’s total votes came from blacks and Hispanics combined. IOW, the White female vote was as crucial to the Trump coalition as NAMs are to the Democratic coalition, simply because there are more of us and we turn out.

    Now, these are back of the envelope calculations with lots of rounding and estimating, but anyone who wants to know can do more precise calculations.

    https://www.people-press.org/2018/08/09/an-examination-of-the-2016-electorate-based-on-validated-voters/

  27. @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

    As with most things you say, you seem to be stuck in the 1969-1974 era.

     

    This is exactly right.

    If Rosie were a Catholic, looking at the massive numbers of apostates, she'd probably tell us to just be patient and wait for the "fruits of the council."

    In any case, I don't know where she grew up, but her idea about politics recently being considered "unladylike" is a travesty. That died decades ago. Sadly.

    That died decades ago. Sadly.

    You’re a moron. Otherwise, it would be obvious to you that there are still millions of women around who grew up with those stereotypes.

  28. @Achmed E. Newman
    I guess it was the less-than and greater-than signs at the beginning and end of my answer set that made it seem like a bad link to the software. Fair enough, I guess.

    Try using &lt; for < and &gt; for >.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Thank you, Mr. Rational.
  29. @Thomm

    We just dedicate more of our time and energy to unpaid labor than men,
     
    False. Women just count their housework, while ignoring what men do (such as mow the lawn, etc.).

    2. We don’t get “massive affirmative action” outside of a very few male-dominated fields that few of us work in anyway.

     

    Super False. California just passed a law that mandates all corporate boards be 40% female. Title IX dominates everything about college life. The women's soccer team is screeching that the law of supply and demand be repealed. Even Steve Sailer points this out repeatedly. A white woman gets vastly more affirmative action than a black man. Of course, black women get a two-fer.

    As with most things you say, you seem to be stuck in the 1969-1974 era.

    False. Women just count their housework, while ignoring what men do (such as mow the lawn, etc.).

    Childcare, stupid. Oh yeah, and then there’s, you know, giving birth, pregnancy, nursing, all those things with which none of you would exist.

    A white woman gets vastly more affirmative action than a black man.

    That is absurd on its face. Black men can’t even get into a decent college on their own chops. The racial gap on the SAT dwarfs the sex gap, and there is virtually no gap on the ACT.

    https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/09/07/act-scores-are-gaps-remain-preparation-and-raceethnicity

    California just passed a law that mandates all corporate boards be 40% female.

    Good. Maybe that’s what it will take to make the corporations stop being so damned greedy. Never mind, the damage is done. White men have been very “productive” this past thirty years systematically exporting our industrial base to China et. al.

    • Replies: @Thomm

    Good. Maybe that’s what it will take to make the corporations stop being so damned greedy
     
    So forcing Boards to be 40% women, independent of any qualification or merit, would force 'corporations to be less greedy', even though women drove the first institution they controlled (public schools) into the ground? You are a superb advertisement of why women's right to vote will eventually be repealed.

    You are just a 1969-era radical leftist feminist. Why on Earth should anyone listen to you, when virtually everything you believe is flat out wrong?

    Read this famous article about how women are indisputably treated far better than men. It will educate you :

    https://www.singularity2050.com/2010/01/the-misandry-bubble.html

    , @Audacious Epigone
    You think more females in corporate boardrooms will lead to less outsourcing?

    I hope you're correct, though I'm skeptical.
  30. @Rosie

    False. Women just count their housework, while ignoring what men do (such as mow the lawn, etc.).
     
    Childcare, stupid. Oh yeah, and then there's, you know, giving birth, pregnancy, nursing, all those things with which none of you would exist.

    A white woman gets vastly more affirmative action than a black man.
     

    That is absurd on its face. Black men can't even get into a decent college on their own chops. The racial gap on the SAT dwarfs the sex gap, and there is virtually no gap on the ACT.

    https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/09/07/act-scores-are-gaps-remain-preparation-and-raceethnicity


    California just passed a law that mandates all corporate boards be 40% female.
     
    Good. Maybe that's what it will take to make the corporations stop being so damned greedy. Never mind, the damage is done. White men have been very "productive" this past thirty years systematically exporting our industrial base to China et. al.

    Good. Maybe that’s what it will take to make the corporations stop being so damned greedy

    So forcing Boards to be 40% women, independent of any qualification or merit, would force ‘corporations to be less greedy’, even though women drove the first institution they controlled (public schools) into the ground? You are a superb advertisement of why women’s right to vote will eventually be repealed.

    You are just a 1969-era radical leftist feminist. Why on Earth should anyone listen to you, when virtually everything you believe is flat out wrong?

    Read this famous article about how women are indisputably treated far better than men. It will educate you :

    https://www.singularity2050.com/2010/01/the-misandry-bubble.html

    • Replies: @Rosie

    Read this famous article about how women are indisputably treated far better than men :
     
    Suppose I read it and it says women are treated better than men. Would that change the fact that lots of men are greedy as hell and have done a piss-poor job of managing our industrial inheritance?

    Aren't we all about staying the harsh truth around here, regardless of "feelz," or does that just apply when men are insulting women?
    , @Rosie

    even though women drove the first institution they controlled (public schools) into the ground?
     
    1. We don't control public schools.
    2. Even if we did, we can't help it teachers need higher and higher salaries to get away from all that cheap labor.
    3. We are not responsible for minority academic failure.
    , @L Woods
    If the “preservation of the white race” involves the appeasement of the Rosies of the world, then by all means, good riddance to the white race. I suspect some Asian and Latin admixture to the ‘white’ composite will help breed the white knight strains out, if anything.
  31. @Thomm

    Good. Maybe that’s what it will take to make the corporations stop being so damned greedy
     
    So forcing Boards to be 40% women, independent of any qualification or merit, would force 'corporations to be less greedy', even though women drove the first institution they controlled (public schools) into the ground? You are a superb advertisement of why women's right to vote will eventually be repealed.

    You are just a 1969-era radical leftist feminist. Why on Earth should anyone listen to you, when virtually everything you believe is flat out wrong?

    Read this famous article about how women are indisputably treated far better than men. It will educate you :

    https://www.singularity2050.com/2010/01/the-misandry-bubble.html

    Read this famous article about how women are indisputably treated far better than men :

    Suppose I read it and it says women are treated better than men. Would that change the fact that lots of men are greedy as hell and have done a piss-poor job of managing our industrial inheritance?

    Aren’t we all about staying the harsh truth around here, regardless of “feelz,” or does that just apply when men are insulting women?

  32. @Thomm

    Good. Maybe that’s what it will take to make the corporations stop being so damned greedy
     
    So forcing Boards to be 40% women, independent of any qualification or merit, would force 'corporations to be less greedy', even though women drove the first institution they controlled (public schools) into the ground? You are a superb advertisement of why women's right to vote will eventually be repealed.

    You are just a 1969-era radical leftist feminist. Why on Earth should anyone listen to you, when virtually everything you believe is flat out wrong?

    Read this famous article about how women are indisputably treated far better than men. It will educate you :

    https://www.singularity2050.com/2010/01/the-misandry-bubble.html

    even though women drove the first institution they controlled (public schools) into the ground?

    1. We don’t control public schools.
    2. Even if we did, we can’t help it teachers need higher and higher salaries to get away from all that cheap labor.
    3. We are not responsible for minority academic failure.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    A little crrredit for Nice White Lady teachers. Although American academic performance is on the decline, demographic groups generally outscore their coethnics in the old country:

    https://www.amren.com/news/2010/12/pisa_scores_sho/
  33. @iffen
    Even something as obvious as that is increasingly perceived as a Hatefact which cannot be alluded to, let alone explicitly stated.

    How much longer will these dating sites be allowing to release preference data?

    The RQ will end up like the JQ. Just asking if there is a question will be grounds for suspicion.

    Yes, and it will happen as the glut of genetic information continues to pour in showing that differences in human populations are more than skin deep. How this plays out in the West is an open question.

    That China will lead the way, however, increasingly does not seem like a question at all to me but rather a statement of fact.

  34. @indocon
    Except those who are gay, jew, and atheists. That still leaves something like 10%-12% of the electorate.

    Younger Jews are less leftist and more supportive of Trumpian populism than older Jews are. The generational differences are pretty stark. It does not seem obvious to me that Jews will remain overwhelmingly Democrat in the coming decades.

    • Replies: @iffen
    It does not seem obvious to me that Jews will remain overwhelmingly Democrat in the coming decades.

    Great! Just what the Republican Party needs - another shrinking demographic.
  35. @Rosie

    False. Women just count their housework, while ignoring what men do (such as mow the lawn, etc.).
     
    Childcare, stupid. Oh yeah, and then there's, you know, giving birth, pregnancy, nursing, all those things with which none of you would exist.

    A white woman gets vastly more affirmative action than a black man.
     

    That is absurd on its face. Black men can't even get into a decent college on their own chops. The racial gap on the SAT dwarfs the sex gap, and there is virtually no gap on the ACT.

    https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/09/07/act-scores-are-gaps-remain-preparation-and-raceethnicity


    California just passed a law that mandates all corporate boards be 40% female.
     
    Good. Maybe that's what it will take to make the corporations stop being so damned greedy. Never mind, the damage is done. White men have been very "productive" this past thirty years systematically exporting our industrial base to China et. al.

    You think more females in corporate boardrooms will lead to less outsourcing?

    I hope you’re correct, though I’m skeptical.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    You think more females in corporate boardrooms will lead to less outsourcing
     
    Probably not now. The low-hanging fruit has already been picked, and the medium-hanging fruit, too.

    I’m skeptical.
     
    I don't see why. Men are Ts. Women are Fs.

    https://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/mbti-basics/thinking-or-feeling.htm?bhcp=1
     https://www.slayerment.com/files/slayerment/styles/large/public/images/manlytypes%5B1%5D.jpg?itok=E9Bg0Dwy

  36. @Audacious Epigone
    Younger Jews are less leftist and more supportive of Trumpian populism than older Jews are. The generational differences are pretty stark. It does not seem obvious to me that Jews will remain overwhelmingly Democrat in the coming decades.

    It does not seem obvious to me that Jews will remain overwhelmingly Democrat in the coming decades.

    Great! Just what the Republican Party needs – another shrinking demographic.

  37. @Audacious Epigone
    You think more females in corporate boardrooms will lead to less outsourcing?

    I hope you're correct, though I'm skeptical.

    You think more females in corporate boardrooms will lead to less outsourcing

    Probably not now. The low-hanging fruit has already been picked, and the medium-hanging fruit, too.

    I’m skeptical.

    I don’t see why. Men are Ts. Women are Fs.

    https://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/mbti-basics/thinking-or-feeling.htm?bhcp=1

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    Men are Ts. Women are Fs.
     
    Our social pathologies are enabled by a surfeit of feelz over thinking... and you think that the cure is more of the disease?!

    Thank you for proving that women should NEVER have been given the vote.
  38. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Women are getting stupider, not smarter.

    Women would vote with their husbands in the past. Therefore they had an idea of politics, and what was good for their family.

    Modern, "empowered" women are too busy being sluts and working the 9-5 slog to know or care. They don't care.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7UloVeCxTs

    Women would vote with their husbands in the past.

    How the hell would you know something like that?

  39. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    INTP gang reporting in. I bet most of this board is INTP. We are unique and highly over represented in the alt right, and online communities in general. Smart outcasts, basically.

    ENTP (One of the least consistently Male-dominated T groups)

  40. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    1 Corinthians 11:3

    3 But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.

    1 Corinthians 11:3

    Oh but we’re hopeless sinners, totally dependent on God to save us from our willful, disobedient, sinful selves.

  41. @Rosie

    even though women drove the first institution they controlled (public schools) into the ground?
     
    1. We don't control public schools.
    2. Even if we did, we can't help it teachers need higher and higher salaries to get away from all that cheap labor.
    3. We are not responsible for minority academic failure.

    A little crrredit for Nice White Lady teachers. Although American academic performance is on the decline, demographic groups generally outscore their coethnics in the old country:

    https://www.amren.com/news/2010/12/pisa_scores_sho/

  42. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    My experience too. Young, practicing Jews are some of the most right wing people I know. They're certainly an improvement over an average white gentile. Their only downside is their fierce loyalty to Israel.

    Frankly an average Jew is getting just as fucked over as an average white man. Maybe more, since they are richer and more likely to be getting outsourced from an Indian. I can't speak for all Jews, but from what I hear at the ground level is the Jews are feeling the squeeze from the aliens pouring in. Since Jews are marginally smarter than whites, they can at least recognize this threat.

    If American nationalists could provide moral cover for Israeli nationalists in exchange for no longer fighting Middle Eastern wars on behalf of Israel (and Saudi Arabia), a US/Israeli alliance would make great sense for nationalists in both countries.

    • Agree: Rosie
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    I've said it before, and I'll say it again (in a blog post soon), I think the Israeli's just want an American presence (carriers, air bases, troops around) in the Middle East over just any specific wars. You only get that when there is continual war-mongering going on, though.

    How about, like your deal, we promise to keep the logistics up and a carrier group or two in the Mediterranean Sea or Persian Gulf, in exchange for support in all media, the Deep State, and other such institutions for a serious end to the immigration invasion of America? Of course, this deal could not be overt, as neither side wants to openly admit that the Israelis have any ability, whatsoever, to keep up their end of the bargain.

    , @dfordoom

    If American nationalists could provide moral cover for Israeli nationalists in exchange for no longer fighting Middle Eastern wars on behalf of Israel (and Saudi Arabia), a US/Israeli alliance would make great sense for nationalists in both countries.
     
    But the only thing Israel wants from a US/Israeli alliance is for the US to fight Middle Eastern wars on behalf of Israel.

    Israel doesn't care about having moral cover.
  43. @Rosie

    You think more females in corporate boardrooms will lead to less outsourcing
     
    Probably not now. The low-hanging fruit has already been picked, and the medium-hanging fruit, too.

    I’m skeptical.
     
    I don't see why. Men are Ts. Women are Fs.

    https://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/mbti-basics/thinking-or-feeling.htm?bhcp=1
     https://www.slayerment.com/files/slayerment/styles/large/public/images/manlytypes%5B1%5D.jpg?itok=E9Bg0Dwy

    Men are Ts. Women are Fs.

    Our social pathologies are enabled by a surfeit of feelz over thinking… and you think that the cure is more of the disease?!

    Thank you for proving that women should NEVER have been given the vote.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Rosie

    Our social pathologies are enabled by a surfeit of feelz over thinking…
     
    Question begging.

    Thank you for proving that women should NEVER have been given the vote.
     
    Because of course.

    Imagine yourself in the following situation: You're a working man and your company is considering replacing you and your whole team with robots.

    Who do you want in the boardroom?

    Answer "a bunch of psychopathic men who spent their whole lives clawing their way to the top" and you're a despicable, shameless, filthy little liar.
    , @L Woods
    No kidding.
  44. @The Alarmist
    Gay: <3%
    Jew: <3%
    AA&OPoC: 30%, split 90/10 with Republicans, so 27%
    Athiests: IDK, 23% split 70/30 with Republicans, so 16%
    Allow -5% "diversification effect" for persons in multiple categories

    That leaves a solid core of dems roughly 44%, which is pretty close to reality. So, do the Dems really have any white males left to lose?

    The Atheist 23% is way too high. My definition of an atheist is somebody who is as avowedly anti-christian, not someone who does not attend church regularly.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    My definition of an atheist is somebody who is as avowedly anti-christian
     
    Does that include those who insist upon freedom from "Christian" rules which cannot be justified without assuming their theology is true?  If a theology cannot start from first principles without claiming divine revelation (which ANYONE can do), how can it claim a right to rule?

    Look at the scisms in theology (of all strains).  Do you REALLY want to make them legal requirements, and foment war over them to impose or be free of them?  Haven't we learned this lesson already?  Isn't Thirty Years (of) War enough?  HTF!
    , @Audacious Epigone
    In 2018, the GSS' most recent year on file, 5% of respondents identified as atheists and another 6% as agnostics.
  45. @Mr. Rational

    Men are Ts. Women are Fs.
     
    Our social pathologies are enabled by a surfeit of feelz over thinking... and you think that the cure is more of the disease?!

    Thank you for proving that women should NEVER have been given the vote.

    Our social pathologies are enabled by a surfeit of feelz over thinking…

    Question begging.

    Thank you for proving that women should NEVER have been given the vote.

    Because of course.

    Imagine yourself in the following situation: You’re a working man and your company is considering replacing you and your whole team with robots.

    Who do you want in the boardroom?

    Answer “a bunch of psychopathic men who spent their whole lives clawing their way to the top” and you’re a despicable, shameless, filthy little liar.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    Imagine yourself in the following situation: You’re a working man and your company is considering replacing you and your whole team with robots.
     
    Already been there, except the robots are "Indian subcontinentals on H-1B visas."

    Answer “a bunch of psychopathic men who spent their whole lives clawing their way to the top” and you’re a despicable, shameless, filthy little liar.
     
    And of course you confirm my estimate of you by retreating to feelz (and insults).  But if I answered "I want a board which is subject to the population putting the public first, not putting some theoretic "economy" which serves no one but its theoretic self first", would you give me credit?  I suspect not.  YOU DO NOT THINK.  And that's the problem with letting women vote.
    , @Rosie
    Being a psychopath helps men get to the top, but not women.

    https://www.inc.com/jessica-stillman/new-study-being-a-bit-of-a-psychopath-helps-you-get-ahead-at-work-if-youre-a-man.html
    , @Rosie

    Our social pathologies are enabled by a surfeit of feelz over thinking…


     

    Further reflections:

    If you take a closer look at the graph I posted, you will see that the three most female-dominant personality types are:

    ENFJ
    ISFJ
    ESFJ

    ENFJ is a very rare personality type, because intuitive-feelers are much more likely to have a perceiving than a judging orientation. However, the other two are very common; together they account for a total of 25% of the female population.

    XFSJs are absolutely not known for being hostile to tradition. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. They are very conventional types, stressed to the extreme by any threat to social consensus. Right now, that social consensus happens to be anything-goes social liberalism, but they are not to blame for that. The social innovations of the past fifty years were conceived by the male-dominant NT group. Being an NT myself, I can say that we cannot be allowed to get out of control, or we will smash everything traditional and laugh at simple folks' cultural and religious sensitivities, as we have been doing for fifty years now.

    https://i2.wp.com/theimaginativeconservative.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/socrates.jpg?ssl=1

    https://www.davidmarkley.com/personality/traditionalist.htm

  46. @Mr. Rational
    Try using &lt; for < and &gt; for >.

    Thank you, Mr. Rational.

  47. @Audacious Epigone
    If American nationalists could provide moral cover for Israeli nationalists in exchange for no longer fighting Middle Eastern wars on behalf of Israel (and Saudi Arabia), a US/Israeli alliance would make great sense for nationalists in both countries.

    I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again (in a blog post soon), I think the Israeli’s just want an American presence (carriers, air bases, troops around) in the Middle East over just any specific wars. You only get that when there is continual war-mongering going on, though.

    How about, like your deal, we promise to keep the logistics up and a carrier group or two in the Mediterranean Sea or Persian Gulf, in exchange for support in all media, the Deep State, and other such institutions for a serious end to the immigration invasion of America? Of course, this deal could not be overt, as neither side wants to openly admit that the Israelis have any ability, whatsoever, to keep up their end of the bargain.

  48. @indocon
    The Atheist 23% is way too high. My definition of an atheist is somebody who is as avowedly anti-christian, not someone who does not attend church regularly.

    My definition of an atheist is somebody who is as avowedly anti-christian

    Does that include those who insist upon freedom from “Christian” rules which cannot be justified without assuming their theology is true?  If a theology cannot start from first principles without claiming divine revelation (which ANYONE can do), how can it claim a right to rule?

    Look at the scisms in theology (of all strains).  Do you REALLY want to make them legal requirements, and foment war over them to impose or be free of them?  Haven’t we learned this lesson already?  Isn’t Thirty Years (of) War enough?  HTF!

  49. Three men in this thread now have lashed out at me, saying I shouldn’t be allowed to vote, making a laughingstock of the dissident right in the eyes of any normie who happens by this page…

    and yet, I’m the irrational one.

    • Agree: iffen
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Feminist feelings stupidity - Exhibit A:

    Nobody's "lashing out", Rosie. We just think women shouldn't be voting. If you tell me men shouldn't be working in day-care centers, I may have an argument back, but I wouldn't consider it "lashing out". Get your feelings under control, cause you are just clogging up these threads with the feminist BS, while you otherwise are on the right track, politically.
  50. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Women are getting stupider, not smarter.

    Women would vote with their husbands in the past. Therefore they had an idea of politics, and what was good for their family.

    Modern, "empowered" women are too busy being sluts and working the 9-5 slog to know or care. They don't care.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7UloVeCxTs

    Thanks, that Judds song brought back memories, UFO.

    Here are 3 inadvertently prescient songs from a little earlier that ring very true right now, from Peak Stupidity’s music series on this sad time in America’s history – Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3. They’re all 3 really great tunes, which you need for a good song, no matter how good the lyrics.

    Paul Simon – American Tune:

    Neil Young – Comin’ Apart at Every Nail:

    Merle Haggard – Are the Good Times Really Over for Good:

  51. @Rosie

    Our social pathologies are enabled by a surfeit of feelz over thinking…
     
    Question begging.

    Thank you for proving that women should NEVER have been given the vote.
     
    Because of course.

    Imagine yourself in the following situation: You're a working man and your company is considering replacing you and your whole team with robots.

    Who do you want in the boardroom?

    Answer "a bunch of psychopathic men who spent their whole lives clawing their way to the top" and you're a despicable, shameless, filthy little liar.

    Imagine yourself in the following situation: You’re a working man and your company is considering replacing you and your whole team with robots.

    Already been there, except the robots are “Indian subcontinentals on H-1B visas.”

    Answer “a bunch of psychopathic men who spent their whole lives clawing their way to the top” and you’re a despicable, shameless, filthy little liar.

    And of course you confirm my estimate of you by retreating to feelz (and insults).  But if I answered “I want a board which is subject to the population putting the public first, not putting some theoretic “economy” which serves no one but its theoretic self first”, would you give me credit?  I suspect not.  YOU DO NOT THINK.  And that’s the problem with letting women vote.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    “I want a board which is subject to the population putting the public first, not putting some theoretic “economy” which serves no one but its theoretic self first”
     
    So in other words, women.

    Very good, and yes you get full credit for that.
  52. @Rosie
    Three men in this thread now have lashed out at me, saying I shouldn't be allowed to vote, making a laughingstock of the dissident right in the eyes of any normie who happens by this page...

    and yet, I'm the irrational one.

    Feminist feelings stupidity – Exhibit A:

    Nobody’s “lashing out”, Rosie. We just think women shouldn’t be voting. If you tell me men shouldn’t be working in day-care centers, I may have an argument back, but I wouldn’t consider it “lashing out”. Get your feelings under control, cause you are just clogging up these threads with the feminist BS, while you otherwise are on the right track, politically.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    Nobody’s “lashing out”, Rosie.
     
    Yes, you are. Your arguments (if you can call them that) don't make any damned sense.

    cause you are just clogging up these threads with the feminist BS,
     
    As soon as the attacks on women stop, I'll go away. You don't get to constantly blame everything on women and then bitch when we fight back.
  53. @Rosie

    Our social pathologies are enabled by a surfeit of feelz over thinking…
     
    Question begging.

    Thank you for proving that women should NEVER have been given the vote.
     
    Because of course.

    Imagine yourself in the following situation: You're a working man and your company is considering replacing you and your whole team with robots.

    Who do you want in the boardroom?

    Answer "a bunch of psychopathic men who spent their whole lives clawing their way to the top" and you're a despicable, shameless, filthy little liar.
  54. @Achmed E. Newman
    Feminist feelings stupidity - Exhibit A:

    Nobody's "lashing out", Rosie. We just think women shouldn't be voting. If you tell me men shouldn't be working in day-care centers, I may have an argument back, but I wouldn't consider it "lashing out". Get your feelings under control, cause you are just clogging up these threads with the feminist BS, while you otherwise are on the right track, politically.

    Nobody’s “lashing out”, Rosie.

    Yes, you are. Your arguments (if you can call them that) don’t make any damned sense.

    cause you are just clogging up these threads with the feminist BS,

    As soon as the attacks on women stop, I’ll go away. You don’t get to constantly blame everything on women and then bitch when we fight back.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    See, they're not attacks. People want a place to seek the truth, and some of the truth may not be to your liking. Tough shit, man up!
  55. @Rosie

    Nobody’s “lashing out”, Rosie.
     
    Yes, you are. Your arguments (if you can call them that) don't make any damned sense.

    cause you are just clogging up these threads with the feminist BS,
     
    As soon as the attacks on women stop, I'll go away. You don't get to constantly blame everything on women and then bitch when we fight back.

    See, they’re not attacks. People want a place to seek the truth, and some of the truth may not be to your liking. Tough shit, man up!

    • Replies: @Rosie

    Tough shit, man up!
     
    Proving you are full of shit is "manning up."

    And perhaps you should consider taking your own advice.


    People want a place to seek the truth
     
    In other words, this is all a pointless navel-gazing operation with no practical agenda whatsoever, just as I thought.

    That's a good thing, because you're certainly never going to accomplish anything going on like this. You all can go right on seeking the truth while your race goes extinct, blaming women for your troubles all the while.
  56. @Mr. Rational

    Imagine yourself in the following situation: You’re a working man and your company is considering replacing you and your whole team with robots.
     
    Already been there, except the robots are "Indian subcontinentals on H-1B visas."

    Answer “a bunch of psychopathic men who spent their whole lives clawing their way to the top” and you’re a despicable, shameless, filthy little liar.
     
    And of course you confirm my estimate of you by retreating to feelz (and insults).  But if I answered "I want a board which is subject to the population putting the public first, not putting some theoretic "economy" which serves no one but its theoretic self first", would you give me credit?  I suspect not.  YOU DO NOT THINK.  And that's the problem with letting women vote.

    “I want a board which is subject to the population putting the public first, not putting some theoretic “economy” which serves no one but its theoretic self first”

    So in other words, women.

    Very good, and yes you get full credit for that.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    So in other words, women.
     
    Women will virtue-signal by opening employment to the entire turd world.  No, no women.

    Married men with children.  Skin in the game, an eye toward the future.
  57. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Country Radio is absolute garbage now. Especially in the past 2 years. It all just sounds like soft, gay R&B. Come on! What are the rednecks supposed to listen to? Is it surprising that young white kids listen to rap, when it's the only "manly" thing available?

    Just go to a country concert, and watch the young guys go nuts during the real country artists (pre 90s). Saw a Toby Keith concert, not super trad but solid enough. We are starving! Give us some real fucking country music you goddam twats. Christian values, redneck, Dixie, family values. Apparently that is not allowed today! If I hate the globalists for one thing with extreme prejudice, it's for killing the country genre. FUCK

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d32h0TuSgEY

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxeocgQIj4Q

    (I know it's keney chesney don't shit on me)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLxbXi2o_ZM

    Past 2 years?! I’ll raise you twenty.

    Thank you very much for the Don Williams, “my 2nd-favorite country singer”.* People don’t remember that he wrote and first sang Tulsa Time.

    Here you go (I really wish I’d named my boy Amos Mose – the wife wouldn’t have had a clue till later!)

    .

    * That was in a line by the late Jerry Reed, in Smokey and the Bandit II(?), where Jerry meant that he, himself, was his favorte.

  58. @Achmed E. Newman
    See, they're not attacks. People want a place to seek the truth, and some of the truth may not be to your liking. Tough shit, man up!

    Tough shit, man up!

    Proving you are full of shit is “manning up.”

    And perhaps you should consider taking your own advice.

    People want a place to seek the truth

    In other words, this is all a pointless navel-gazing operation with no practical agenda whatsoever, just as I thought.

    That’s a good thing, because you’re certainly never going to accomplish anything going on like this. You all can go right on seeking the truth while your race goes extinct, blaming women for your troubles all the while.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    How's that? You've got to get to the truth before you can find the right way. Part of any new conservative society, if it ever happens, will be creation of a social order more in line with the laws of nature again (the Bible has something to say about it too). You need to support your man and be subservient. It can't work otherwise - we are living through the misery of the feminist and other stupidity - how can one not notice?
  59. @Rosie

    Tough shit, man up!
     
    Proving you are full of shit is "manning up."

    And perhaps you should consider taking your own advice.


    People want a place to seek the truth
     
    In other words, this is all a pointless navel-gazing operation with no practical agenda whatsoever, just as I thought.

    That's a good thing, because you're certainly never going to accomplish anything going on like this. You all can go right on seeking the truth while your race goes extinct, blaming women for your troubles all the while.

    How’s that? You’ve got to get to the truth before you can find the right way. Part of any new conservative society, if it ever happens, will be creation of a social order more in line with the laws of nature again (the Bible has something to say about it too). You need to support your man and be subservient. It can’t work otherwise – we are living through the misery of the feminist and other stupidity – how can one not notice?

    • Replies: @Rosie

    It can’t work otherwise –
     
    I'm going to channel my inner Stephan Molyneux and tell you that's not an argument.
  60. One sentence from Rosie had so much leftist/feminist lunacy in it that it is jawdropping for its density.

    I said that California just passed a law that 40% of Corporate BoDs should be female.

    In response, Rosie said :

    Good. Maybe that’s what it will take to make the corporations stop being so damned greedy

    The premises contained therein are :

    i) That women are inherently more moral than men.
    ii) That women understand the greater good, and that socialism IS the greater good.
    iii) That quotas for women should exist, ahead of merit or even basic qualifications.
    iv) That a corporation exists only for the purpose of ‘greed’ (nevermind that one can buy shares in a public corporation).
    v) That it will not lead to the corporation moving its HQ out of California and to another state. When Norway passed exactly the same law, tons of companies left Norway (notably Tandberg, which got acquired by Cisco for just this reason alone).

    I mean, good lord! The sheer ignorance and 8-year-old level of economic/fiscal understanding on display here is breathtaking. I bet Rosie thinks Merkel, May, Gillard, Ardern, Marissa Mayer, and Theranos are successes.

    The fruits of female suffrage.

    • Agree: Mark G.
    • Replies: @Rosie

    i) That women are inherently more moral than men.

     

    Um, no. My position is that you get better decision-making when both men and women participate. We complement each other. The perspective of neither is complete without the other.

    iii) That quotas for women should exist, ahead of merit or even basic qualifications.
     
    No again. Like most White women, I don't support quotas, except in certain positions that involve sensitive decisions affecting the people. Not having women represented on corporate boards would be worse than not having them vote. We all know the corporations run everything anyway.

    The Supreme Court should also be gender balanced IMO. Left to your own devices, you would starve prisoners. Mr. Achmed admitted as much point blank yesterday.


    v) That it will not lead to the corporation moving its HQ out of California and to another state. When Norway passed exactly the same law, tons of companies left Norway (notably Tandberg, which got acquired by Cisco for just this reason alone).
     
    Either way, that doesn't answer the question of whether or not the public would be better off with more women on corporate boards.

    I understand that corporations have ways of blackmailing governments to get their way, but I'm pretty sure a government with the will could find a way to rein them in.

  61. @Achmed E. Newman
    How's that? You've got to get to the truth before you can find the right way. Part of any new conservative society, if it ever happens, will be creation of a social order more in line with the laws of nature again (the Bible has something to say about it too). You need to support your man and be subservient. It can't work otherwise - we are living through the misery of the feminist and other stupidity - how can one not notice?

    It can’t work otherwise –

    I’m going to channel my inner Stephan Molyneux and tell you that’s not an argument.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Arguments don't work on women - they prolong the agony. Go ahead, get the last word - I'll listen to some real country music.
  62. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    I can deal with 2000s country. At least it's COUNTRY. Even if it's not traditional. Listen to country radio now and it's not even recognizable as country. I would write my true opinion on Nashville execs but I would be banned and probably raided by the FBI. FUck Bobby Boners.

    Nothing pisses me off like new country, i'm completely serious. destroying a way of life.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qkoZQRbl3s

    Yes, that’s also on his Greatest Hits, along with this one more, at the risk of clogging up the server. SORRY A.E.! Great cowboy/western pics.

    I can’t say I’ve listened to a single country song from the last 2 years, though, UFO. I thought there were some “classic country” stations.

  63. @Rosie

    It can’t work otherwise –
     
    I'm going to channel my inner Stephan Molyneux and tell you that's not an argument.

    Arguments don’t work on women – they prolong the agony. Go ahead, get the last word – I’ll listen to some real country music.

  64. @Thomm
    One sentence from Rosie had so much leftist/feminist lunacy in it that it is jawdropping for its density.

    I said that California just passed a law that 40% of Corporate BoDs should be female.

    In response, Rosie said :


    Good. Maybe that’s what it will take to make the corporations stop being so damned greedy
     
    The premises contained therein are :

    i) That women are inherently more moral than men.
    ii) That women understand the greater good, and that socialism IS the greater good.
    iii) That quotas for women should exist, ahead of merit or even basic qualifications.
    iv) That a corporation exists only for the purpose of 'greed' (nevermind that one can buy shares in a public corporation).
    v) That it will not lead to the corporation moving its HQ out of California and to another state. When Norway passed exactly the same law, tons of companies left Norway (notably Tandberg, which got acquired by Cisco for just this reason alone).

    I mean, good lord! The sheer ignorance and 8-year-old level of economic/fiscal understanding on display here is breathtaking. I bet Rosie thinks Merkel, May, Gillard, Ardern, Marissa Mayer, and Theranos are successes.

    The fruits of female suffrage.

    i) That women are inherently more moral than men.

    Um, no. My position is that you get better decision-making when both men and women participate. We complement each other. The perspective of neither is complete without the other.

    iii) That quotas for women should exist, ahead of merit or even basic qualifications.

    No again. Like most White women, I don’t support quotas, except in certain positions that involve sensitive decisions affecting the people. Not having women represented on corporate boards would be worse than not having them vote. We all know the corporations run everything anyway.

    The Supreme Court should also be gender balanced IMO. Left to your own devices, you would starve prisoners. Mr. Achmed admitted as much point blank yesterday.

    v) That it will not lead to the corporation moving its HQ out of California and to another state. When Norway passed exactly the same law, tons of companies left Norway (notably Tandberg, which got acquired by Cisco for just this reason alone).

    Either way, that doesn’t answer the question of whether or not the public would be better off with more women on corporate boards.

    I understand that corporations have ways of blackmailing governments to get their way, but I’m pretty sure a government with the will could find a way to rein them in.

  65. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Shut up woman. This is you (minus the nice legs and face of Shania):

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8N2k-gv6xNE

    Shut up woman.

    Oh you’ve gone back to thinking I’m a woman again? Good, I’m glad we got that straightened out. And this is you:

  66. @indocon
    The Atheist 23% is way too high. My definition of an atheist is somebody who is as avowedly anti-christian, not someone who does not attend church regularly.

    In 2018, the GSS’ most recent year on file, 5% of respondents identified as atheists and another 6% as agnostics.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    In 2018, the GSS’ most recent year on file, 5% of respondents identified as atheists and another 6% as agnostics.
     
    Which means 89% are religious? That's clearly nonsense. A good example of why surveys are mostly useless.
    , @The Alarmist
    Thanks. So that theoretically leaves 5% of the electorate to change sides.

    On another topic, you wouldn't happen to keep stats of US eyeglass wearers by party affiliation?

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/expensive-law-firm-to-outsmart-its-female-quota-with-nonbinaries/#comment-3317011
  67. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Country Radio is absolute garbage now. Especially in the past 2 years. It all just sounds like soft, gay R&B. Come on! What are the rednecks supposed to listen to? Is it surprising that young white kids listen to rap, when it's the only "manly" thing available?

    Just go to a country concert, and watch the young guys go nuts during the real country artists (pre 90s). Saw a Toby Keith concert, not super trad but solid enough. We are starving! Give us some real fucking country music you goddam twats. Christian values, redneck, Dixie, family values. Apparently that is not allowed today! If I hate the globalists for one thing with extreme prejudice, it's for killing the country genre. FUCK

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d32h0TuSgEY

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxeocgQIj4Q

    (I know it's keney chesney don't shit on me)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLxbXi2o_ZM

    That’s an obvious connection I’m ashamed to say I’ve never made, the one between masculinity/virility and rap. There is the Big Man trigger-happy honor ethos of rap or there is gelded pedestalizing, nihilistic ennui, etc for young men. No wonder I hear so many young guys talking about music that came before even my time.

  68. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Country Radio is absolute garbage now. Especially in the past 2 years. It all just sounds like soft, gay R&B. Come on! What are the rednecks supposed to listen to? Is it surprising that young white kids listen to rap, when it's the only "manly" thing available?

    Just go to a country concert, and watch the young guys go nuts during the real country artists (pre 90s). Saw a Toby Keith concert, not super trad but solid enough. We are starving! Give us some real fucking country music you goddam twats. Christian values, redneck, Dixie, family values. Apparently that is not allowed today! If I hate the globalists for one thing with extreme prejudice, it's for killing the country genre. FUCK

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d32h0TuSgEY

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxeocgQIj4Q

    (I know it's keney chesney don't shit on me)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLxbXi2o_ZM

    I listened to some country growing up and my wife occasionally listens to it now. From that limited exposure, it’s hard to disagree with the thrust of your assessment.

    With that as a thin pretext, my favorite country track:

  69. @Audacious Epigone
    If American nationalists could provide moral cover for Israeli nationalists in exchange for no longer fighting Middle Eastern wars on behalf of Israel (and Saudi Arabia), a US/Israeli alliance would make great sense for nationalists in both countries.

    If American nationalists could provide moral cover for Israeli nationalists in exchange for no longer fighting Middle Eastern wars on behalf of Israel (and Saudi Arabia), a US/Israeli alliance would make great sense for nationalists in both countries.

    But the only thing Israel wants from a US/Israeli alliance is for the US to fight Middle Eastern wars on behalf of Israel.

    Israel doesn’t care about having moral cover.

  70. @Audacious Epigone
    In 2018, the GSS' most recent year on file, 5% of respondents identified as atheists and another 6% as agnostics.

    In 2018, the GSS’ most recent year on file, 5% of respondents identified as atheists and another 6% as agnostics.

    Which means 89% are religious? That’s clearly nonsense. A good example of why surveys are mostly useless.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    Which means 89% are religious? That’s clearly nonsense.
     
    I don't know about that. There is a difference between being a casual theist and being religious. A surprising number of people believe in a God that is not very demanding.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Being theistic and being religious are not the same things. Lots of people say they believe in God without ever participating in any sort of religious rituals at all, and a lot more are 'Christmas eggs'--those who go to church on Easter and Christmas but no other times during the year.
  71. @dfordoom

    In 2018, the GSS’ most recent year on file, 5% of respondents identified as atheists and another 6% as agnostics.
     
    Which means 89% are religious? That's clearly nonsense. A good example of why surveys are mostly useless.

    Which means 89% are religious? That’s clearly nonsense.

    I don’t know about that. There is a difference between being a casual theist and being religious. A surprising number of people believe in a God that is not very demanding.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  72. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Not in Canada. As you approach the Mason Dixon line, (around Dayton,OH and Pittsburg) you start to hear some classic country stations. We only get "new country". The last decent station in Ontario, 107.3 got sold out a year ago. 98.7 FM is it but it's pretty obscure bluegrass. I believe there's only one or two stations left in all of Canada that have a Classic, or mixed Classic format.

    Interesting.  The “Trucker Radio” program is out of Canada.  Have you heard it, and if so, how would you rate their selection of music?

  73. @Rosie

    Our social pathologies are enabled by a surfeit of feelz over thinking…
     
    Question begging.

    Thank you for proving that women should NEVER have been given the vote.
     
    Because of course.

    Imagine yourself in the following situation: You're a working man and your company is considering replacing you and your whole team with robots.

    Who do you want in the boardroom?

    Answer "a bunch of psychopathic men who spent their whole lives clawing their way to the top" and you're a despicable, shameless, filthy little liar.

    Our social pathologies are enabled by a surfeit of feelz over thinking…

    Further reflections:

    If you take a closer look at the graph I posted, you will see that the three most female-dominant personality types are:

    ENFJ
    ISFJ
    ESFJ

    ENFJ is a very rare personality type, because intuitive-feelers are much more likely to have a perceiving than a judging orientation. However, the other two are very common; together they account for a total of 25% of the female population.

    XFSJs are absolutely not known for being hostile to tradition. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. They are very conventional types, stressed to the extreme by any threat to social consensus. Right now, that social consensus happens to be anything-goes social liberalism, but they are not to blame for that. The social innovations of the past fifty years were conceived by the male-dominant NT group. Being an NT myself, I can say that we cannot be allowed to get out of control, or we will smash everything traditional and laugh at simple folks’ cultural and religious sensitivities, as we have been doing for fifty years now.

    https://www.davidmarkley.com/personality/traditionalist.htm

  74. @Audacious Epigone
    In 2018, the GSS' most recent year on file, 5% of respondents identified as atheists and another 6% as agnostics.

    Thanks. So that theoretically leaves 5% of the electorate to change sides.

    On another topic, you wouldn’t happen to keep stats of US eyeglass wearers by party affiliation?

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/expensive-law-firm-to-outsmart-its-female-quota-with-nonbinaries/#comment-3317011

  75. @Rosie

    “I want a board which is subject to the population putting the public first, not putting some theoretic “economy” which serves no one but its theoretic self first”
     
    So in other words, women.

    Very good, and yes you get full credit for that.

    So in other words, women.

    Women will virtue-signal by opening employment to the entire turd world.  No, no women.

    Married men with children.  Skin in the game, an eye toward the future.

  76. Women will virtue-signal by opening employment to the entire turd world.

    Which is why White women voted for Trump, I’m sure, despite the most hostile media coverage of any presidential candidate ever.

    No, no women.

    You don’t get to decide.

    Married men with children. Skin in the game, an eye toward the future.

    Because married women with children don’t have any “skin in the game.”

    You can go on trying to rationalize your irrational prejudice and hostility all you want, but it is quite obvious what you’re doing.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    All four of the state’s U.S. House representatives co-sponsored HR1044, the Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act, which passed on a vote of 365-65 Wednesday afternoon. A Senate version of the bill, which Utah GOP Sen. Mike Lee sponsors and has been championing for years, has been stalled out but may get a boost from the widespread support the House version garnered. …”
     
    http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2019/07/10/house-republicans-deliver-cheap-labor-for-google/

    Who are these Utah House Republicans virtue-signalling for "fairness for high-skilled immigrants"?

    https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/UT#representatives
  77. @Rosie

    Women will virtue-signal by opening employment to the entire turd world.
     
    Which is why White women voted for Trump, I'm sure, despite the most hostile media coverage of any presidential candidate ever.

    No, no women.
     
    You don't get to decide.

    Married men with children. Skin in the game, an eye toward the future.
     
    Because married women with children don't have any "skin in the game."

    You can go on trying to rationalize your irrational prejudice and hostility all you want, but it is quite obvious what you're doing.

    All four of the state’s U.S. House representatives co-sponsored HR1044, the Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act, which passed on a vote of 365-65 Wednesday afternoon. A Senate version of the bill, which Utah GOP Sen. Mike Lee sponsors and has been championing for years, has been stalled out but may get a boost from the widespread support the House version garnered. …”

    http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2019/07/10/house-republicans-deliver-cheap-labor-for-google/

    Who are these Utah House Republicans virtue-signalling for “fairness for high-skilled immigrants”?

    https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/UT#representatives

  78. @Thomm
    The first chart.....it appears that the knowledge level of women, in aggregate, appears to be exactly 77% of that of men.

    Hence, that means that payscales in the real economy are working in perfect accordance with aptitude.

    Funny, but the 77/100 pay gap is actually evidence of gross discrimination against men.

    • Replies: @Thomm

    Funny, but the 77/100 pay gap is actually evidence of gross discrimination against men.
     
    True. Relative to actual output generated, women are paid MUCH more than men.

    Plus, almost all government spending is a transfer from men to women.

    Plus, women get far shorter sentences for the same crime, vs. men.
  79. @Thomm

    Good. Maybe that’s what it will take to make the corporations stop being so damned greedy
     
    So forcing Boards to be 40% women, independent of any qualification or merit, would force 'corporations to be less greedy', even though women drove the first institution they controlled (public schools) into the ground? You are a superb advertisement of why women's right to vote will eventually be repealed.

    You are just a 1969-era radical leftist feminist. Why on Earth should anyone listen to you, when virtually everything you believe is flat out wrong?

    Read this famous article about how women are indisputably treated far better than men. It will educate you :

    https://www.singularity2050.com/2010/01/the-misandry-bubble.html

    If the “preservation of the white race” involves the appeasement of the Rosies of the world, then by all means, good riddance to the white race. I suspect some Asian and Latin admixture to the ‘white’ composite will help breed the white knight strains out, if anything.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    If the “preservation of the white race” involves the appeasement of the Rosies of the world, then by all means, good riddance to the white race.
     
    This is the sort of clarity we need.

    The race traitors who put their need to be smoked out and ruthlessly extirpated from pro-White circles, else this will remain a pointless online subculture of antisocial rejects.

    , @Rosie

    I suspect some Asian and Latin admixture to the ‘white’ composite will help breed the white knight strains out, if anything.
     
    Woods, do you keep a chart like this on your wall?

    https://bbs.thegoyimknow.to/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/kVISrVM.png
  80. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    INTP gang reporting in. I bet most of this board is INTP. We are unique and highly over represented in the alt right, and online communities in general. Smart outcasts, basically.

    Also an INTP. However smart we may be, nobody listens to or appreciate us, and the value we create is appropriated by ExxJ types. It’s not a fun way of life.

  81. @Mr. Rational

    Men are Ts. Women are Fs.
     
    Our social pathologies are enabled by a surfeit of feelz over thinking... and you think that the cure is more of the disease?!

    Thank you for proving that women should NEVER have been given the vote.

    No kidding.

  82. @L Woods
    If the “preservation of the white race” involves the appeasement of the Rosies of the world, then by all means, good riddance to the white race. I suspect some Asian and Latin admixture to the ‘white’ composite will help breed the white knight strains out, if anything.

    If the “preservation of the white race” involves the appeasement of the Rosies of the world, then by all means, good riddance to the white race.

    This is the sort of clarity we need.

    The race traitors who put their need to be smoked out and ruthlessly extirpated from pro-White circles, else this will remain a pointless online subculture of antisocial rejects.

    • Replies: @L Woods
    Self awareness score: -100
  83. @L Woods
    If the “preservation of the white race” involves the appeasement of the Rosies of the world, then by all means, good riddance to the white race. I suspect some Asian and Latin admixture to the ‘white’ composite will help breed the white knight strains out, if anything.

    I suspect some Asian and Latin admixture to the ‘white’ composite will help breed the white knight strains out, if anything.

    Woods, do you keep a chart like this on your wall?

  84. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    @Audacious Epigone

    Why is Rosie not banned yet? 90% of this thread is him trolling.

    Because this site is filled with thirsty boomers

  85. Lurkers: Note the abandonment of any pretense to concern for “truth” as these losers lick their wounds.

  86. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Get rid of your blackpill attitudes lol. So depressing. You need Jesus (not kidding). People have great respect for me and I'm known to be highly intelligent and competent.

    Riiight. That shines right through with your internet posturing. Did you forget that you’re a self-admitted “outcast” just a couple of posts ago?

  87. @Rosie

    If the “preservation of the white race” involves the appeasement of the Rosies of the world, then by all means, good riddance to the white race.
     
    This is the sort of clarity we need.

    The race traitors who put their need to be smoked out and ruthlessly extirpated from pro-White circles, else this will remain a pointless online subculture of antisocial rejects.

    Self awareness score: -100

    • Agree: Thomm
  88. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    INTP gang reporting in. I bet most of this board is INTP. We are unique and highly over represented in the alt right, and online communities in general. Smart outcasts, basically.

    LOL…INTP as well. We may not agree on much, but we have the same personality type. 😉

  89. @L Woods
    Funny, but the 77/100 pay gap is actually evidence of gross discrimination against men.

    Funny, but the 77/100 pay gap is actually evidence of gross discrimination against men.

    True. Relative to actual output generated, women are paid MUCH more than men.

    Plus, almost all government spending is a transfer from men to women.

    Plus, women get far shorter sentences for the same crime, vs. men.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    Plus, women get far shorter sentences for the same crime, vs. men.
     
    Muh biased courts!

    Plus, almost all government spending is a transfer from men to women.
     
    This place is seriously descending into madness. As if men don't use Medicare, drive on the highways, take out student loans, collect military pensions....

    https://media.nationalpriorities.org/uploads/total_spending_pie%2C__2015_enacted.png
  90. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    One can be an outcast and still be well respected. I'm known to be somewhat strange, but also smart. You should start praying and working out. I hope it helps with your depression (it generally works).

    Both of these are scientifically proven to help, BTW.

    I’m an atheist but never attack religion for just this reason.

  91. @Thomm

    Funny, but the 77/100 pay gap is actually evidence of gross discrimination against men.
     
    True. Relative to actual output generated, women are paid MUCH more than men.

    Plus, almost all government spending is a transfer from men to women.

    Plus, women get far shorter sentences for the same crime, vs. men.

    Plus, women get far shorter sentences for the same crime, vs. men.

    Muh biased courts!

    Plus, almost all government spending is a transfer from men to women.

    This place is seriously descending into madness. As if men don’t use Medicare, drive on the highways, take out student loans, collect military pensions….

    • Replies: @Thomm

    As if men don’t use Medicare, drive on the highways, take out student loans, collect military pensions….

     

    It is called percentages, you innumerate dumbass.

    Men pay about 75% of all taxes, but women use about 75% of all government spending (including the fact that women are 70% of all government non-military employees, mostly in make-work jobs that should not exist at all).

    75% is not 100%, but is still a majority. Go take third-grade arithmetic again.

    It is a national shame that women get vastly lower sentences for the same crime as men. At least you admitted that is true (but you don't see that as wrong, which is even worse).

    But keep talking; you are doing a superb job of exposing how women are not suitable for adult-level subjects, and should not have voting rights.

  92. @Rosie

    Plus, women get far shorter sentences for the same crime, vs. men.
     
    Muh biased courts!

    Plus, almost all government spending is a transfer from men to women.
     
    This place is seriously descending into madness. As if men don't use Medicare, drive on the highways, take out student loans, collect military pensions....

    https://media.nationalpriorities.org/uploads/total_spending_pie%2C__2015_enacted.png

    As if men don’t use Medicare, drive on the highways, take out student loans, collect military pensions….

    It is called percentages, you innumerate dumbass.

    Men pay about 75% of all taxes, but women use about 75% of all government spending (including the fact that women are 70% of all government non-military employees, mostly in make-work jobs that should not exist at all).

    75% is not 100%, but is still a majority. Go take third-grade arithmetic again.

    It is a national shame that women get vastly lower sentences for the same crime as men. At least you admitted that is true (but you don’t see that as wrong, which is even worse).

    But keep talking; you are doing a superb job of exposing how women are not suitable for adult-level subjects, and should not have voting rights.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    It is a national shame that women get vastly lower sentences for the same crime as men.
     
    A criminal trial has two phases: (1) the guilt phase, and (2) the penalty phase.

    During the penalty phase, the court must consider mitigating and aggravating circumstances. It is entirely possible that two people can be convicted of the same offence yet deserve very different penalties.

    https://www.justia.com/criminal/aggravating-mitigating-factors/

    Now, if it is true that men are punished more severely for exactly the same crime with exactly the same balance of aggravating and mitigating circumstances, then yes that is an injustice.

    I'm skeptical, and you certainly haven't provided any evidence to that effect, but then you never do provide any evidence to support your claims.

    Take your claim that "men" pay 75% of taxes. How did you arrive at that figure. I'm a homeschooling SAHM. Do I pay taxes?
  93. @dfordoom

    In 2018, the GSS’ most recent year on file, 5% of respondents identified as atheists and another 6% as agnostics.
     
    Which means 89% are religious? That's clearly nonsense. A good example of why surveys are mostly useless.

    Being theistic and being religious are not the same things. Lots of people say they believe in God without ever participating in any sort of religious rituals at all, and a lot more are ‘Christmas eggs’–those who go to church on Easter and Christmas but no other times during the year.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    Being theistic and being religious are not the same things. Lots of people say they believe in God without ever participating in any sort of religious rituals at all, and a lot more are ‘Christmas eggs’–those who go to church on Easter and Christmas but no other times during the year.
     
    Yes. And I don't count such people as religious. There are quite a few people who are kinda pantheistic - they have some vague idea that everything is God. In practice they're indistinguishable from atheists. Or the people who say they don't believe in institutional religion but they're spiritual.

    There are people who say they are Christians but would be horrified if you suggested that maybe actually following the teachings of Christianity is an essential part of being a Christian. You know, the sorts of people who think they can be Christians and also be totally cool with adultery, premarital sex, homosexuality, etc.

    The ones who go to church on Easter and Christmas but no other times during the year are cultural Christians. You know, like Church of England bishops who don't believe in God (a category that includes every Church of England bishop in England). I count them as atheists.

    What matters is the divide between those who are genuinely religious and those who are effectively irreligious. And the genuinely religious are definitely a minority in the United States. In the West outside the U.S. they're a tiny minority.
  94. @Audacious Epigone
    Being theistic and being religious are not the same things. Lots of people say they believe in God without ever participating in any sort of religious rituals at all, and a lot more are 'Christmas eggs'--those who go to church on Easter and Christmas but no other times during the year.

    Being theistic and being religious are not the same things. Lots of people say they believe in God without ever participating in any sort of religious rituals at all, and a lot more are ‘Christmas eggs’–those who go to church on Easter and Christmas but no other times during the year.

    Yes. And I don’t count such people as religious. There are quite a few people who are kinda pantheistic – they have some vague idea that everything is God. In practice they’re indistinguishable from atheists. Or the people who say they don’t believe in institutional religion but they’re spiritual.

    There are people who say they are Christians but would be horrified if you suggested that maybe actually following the teachings of Christianity is an essential part of being a Christian. You know, the sorts of people who think they can be Christians and also be totally cool with adultery, premarital sex, homosexuality, etc.

    The ones who go to church on Easter and Christmas but no other times during the year are cultural Christians. You know, like Church of England bishops who don’t believe in God (a category that includes every Church of England bishop in England). I count them as atheists.

    What matters is the divide between those who are genuinely religious and those who are effectively irreligious. And the genuinely religious are definitely a minority in the United States. In the West outside the U.S. they’re a tiny minority.

  95. A good poll that you can perhaps run some further analysis on (break down by gender, background, party-affiliation, etc.):

    Peace.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  96. @Thomm

    As if men don’t use Medicare, drive on the highways, take out student loans, collect military pensions….

     

    It is called percentages, you innumerate dumbass.

    Men pay about 75% of all taxes, but women use about 75% of all government spending (including the fact that women are 70% of all government non-military employees, mostly in make-work jobs that should not exist at all).

    75% is not 100%, but is still a majority. Go take third-grade arithmetic again.

    It is a national shame that women get vastly lower sentences for the same crime as men. At least you admitted that is true (but you don't see that as wrong, which is even worse).

    But keep talking; you are doing a superb job of exposing how women are not suitable for adult-level subjects, and should not have voting rights.

    It is a national shame that women get vastly lower sentences for the same crime as men.

    A criminal trial has two phases: (1) the guilt phase, and (2) the penalty phase.

    During the penalty phase, the court must consider mitigating and aggravating circumstances. It is entirely possible that two people can be convicted of the same offence yet deserve very different penalties.

    https://www.justia.com/criminal/aggravating-mitigating-factors/

    Now, if it is true that men are punished more severely for exactly the same crime with exactly the same balance of aggravating and mitigating circumstances, then yes that is an injustice.

    I’m skeptical, and you certainly haven’t provided any evidence to that effect, but then you never do provide any evidence to support your claims.

    Take your claim that “men” pay 75% of taxes. How did you arrive at that figure. I’m a homeschooling SAHM. Do I pay taxes?

  97. “Maybe that’s what it will take to make the corporations stop being so damned greedy. Never mind, the damage is done. White men have been very “productive” this past thirty years systematically exporting our industrial base to China et. al.”

    I take it you mean women such as

    Mrs. Carly Fiorina

    Celia Stewart

    Ruth Porat

    Shelley O’Conner

    Anne Finucane

    https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2013/04/45260/women-in-finance-new-york-times

    And taking note of their positions and where they work — you might want to reconsider your view. Not as a given, but history strongly suggests they are not working in the best interests of the middle class or below.

    I am certainly open to being incorrect.
    _______________________

    Hmmmmmmm . . . wondering which of them is single and available and looking . . .

    • Replies: @Rosie
    This argument is a variation on IKAGO. The inverse in fact: IKABO.

    https://psmag.com/economics/dont-women-commit-corporate-fraud-gender-business-91071
  98. @EliteCommInc.
    "Maybe that’s what it will take to make the corporations stop being so damned greedy. Never mind, the damage is done. White men have been very “productive” this past thirty years systematically exporting our industrial base to China et. al."


    I take it you mean women such as


    Mrs. Carly Fiorina

    Celia Stewart


    Ruth Porat


    Shelley O'Conner


    Anne Finucane

    https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2013/04/45260/women-in-finance-new-york-times

    And taking note of their positions and where they work -- you might want to reconsider your view. Not as a given, but history strongly suggests they are not working in the best interests of the middle class or below.

    I am certainly open to being incorrect.
    _______________________

    Hmmmmmmm . . . wondering which of them is single and available and looking . . .

    This argument is a variation on IKAGO. The inverse in fact: IKABO.

    https://psmag.com/economics/dont-women-commit-corporate-fraud-gender-business-91071

  99. “This argument is a variation on IKAGO. The inverse in fact: IKABO.”

    Laughing — beware content that begins we simply don’t know — but the research . . . suggests . . .

    Here’s a helpful minder since we are talking about a specific profession which ranks in the bottom list of honesty according to,

    https://smartasset.com/career/top-ten-most-honest-professions

    Bottom Ten in Honest/Ethics
    10. Local Office Holders – 23% rated them very high/high on ethics; Part-time pay-$20,000+

    9. Business Executives – 22%; $168,140

    8. Newspaper Reporters – 21%; $53,880 (Editors, reporters, etc.)

    7. Lawyers – 20%; $113,530

    6. TV Reporters – 20%; $35,870 (non anchors)

    5. Advertising Practitioners – 14%; $119,480

    4. State Office Holders – 14%; $43,000-$179,000

    3. Car Salesmen – 9%; $63,800 (WSJ.com)

    2. Members of Congress – 8%; $174,000 (payscale.com)

    1. Lobbyists – 6%; $101,529 (11.Salary.com)

    Applying the following article indicates that women are as dishonest as men in the area we are discussing. Further you are attempting to make a spin. That spin is to change the discussion from honesty to outsourcing as opposed to honesty in relation to keeping jobs at home. And my initial comment goes to that — given their positions and who they work with and for “outsourcing” to profit motive above the legal considerations of US Constitutional parameters would most likely come first. Which may explain why none of these women resigned their posts in relation to the 2007/2008 financial matter. And Mrs Fiorina who tops my list has a dubious record on honest dealings, despite her role in outsourcing. I did not mention Sec. Clinton’s corporate and business behavior as a matter of politeness, ignoring her corporate lawyering days.

    Women may be more honest than men. but that all depends on circumstances and field — in business — not so much.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    Further you are attempting to make a spin. That spin is to change the discussion from honesty to outsourcing as opposed to honesty in relation to keeping jobs at home.
     
    That was you who changed the discussion from outsourcing to honesty, if I'm not mistaken.

    The thing about outsourcing is that it creates diffuse benefits and concentrated pain, and women are more bothered by concentrated pain than men. You can see this in women's greater support for welfare. Remember, trade restrictions are a subsidy; they are in fact a kind of welfare.

    https://fee.org/articles/tariffs-are-just-another-form-of-welfare/
  100. @EliteCommInc.
    "This argument is a variation on IKAGO. The inverse in fact: IKABO."

    Laughing --- beware content that begins we simply don't know -- but the research . . . suggests . . .


    Here's a helpful minder since we are talking about a specific profession which ranks in the bottom list of honesty according to,

    https://smartasset.com/career/top-ten-most-honest-professions

    Bottom Ten in Honest/Ethics
    10. Local Office Holders – 23% rated them very high/high on ethics; Part-time pay-$20,000+

    9. Business Executives – 22%; $168,140

    8. Newspaper Reporters – 21%; $53,880 (Editors, reporters, etc.)

    7. Lawyers – 20%; $113,530

    6. TV Reporters – 20%; $35,870 (non anchors)

    5. Advertising Practitioners – 14%; $119,480

    4. State Office Holders – 14%; $43,000-$179,000

    3. Car Salesmen – 9%; $63,800 (WSJ.com)

    2. Members of Congress – 8%; $174,000 (payscale.com)

    1. Lobbyists – 6%; $101,529 (11.Salary.com)

    Applying the following article indicates that women are as dishonest as men in the area we are discussing. Further you are attempting to make a spin. That spin is to change the discussion from honesty to outsourcing as opposed to honesty in relation to keeping jobs at home. And my initial comment goes to that -- given their positions and who they work with and for "outsourcing" to profit motive above the legal considerations of US Constitutional parameters would most likely come first. Which may explain why none of these women resigned their posts in relation to the 2007/2008 financial matter. And Mrs Fiorina who tops my list has a dubious record on honest dealings, despite her role in outsourcing. I did not mention Sec. Clinton's corporate and business behavior as a matter of politeness, ignoring her corporate lawyering days.

    Women may be more honest than men. but that all depends on circumstances and field --- in business -- not so much.

    Further you are attempting to make a spin. That spin is to change the discussion from honesty to outsourcing as opposed to honesty in relation to keeping jobs at home.

    That was you who changed the discussion from outsourcing to honesty, if I’m not mistaken.

    The thing about outsourcing is that it creates diffuse benefits and concentrated pain, and women are more bothered by concentrated pain than men. You can see this in women’s greater support for welfare. Remember, trade restrictions are a subsidy; they are in fact a kind of welfare.

    https://fee.org/articles/tariffs-are-just-another-form-of-welfare/

    • Replies: @Rosie
    I wonder if a woman has ever been caught cheating at chess?

    https://www.chess.com/news/view/igors-rausis-58-under-investigation-of-cheating

    I did a Google search and I found some stories about false accusations, but nothing that ever went anywhere.

    What sort of bizarre psychology would lead a person to do such a thing? I can't even begin to wrap my mind around it.
  101. @Rosie

    Further you are attempting to make a spin. That spin is to change the discussion from honesty to outsourcing as opposed to honesty in relation to keeping jobs at home.
     
    That was you who changed the discussion from outsourcing to honesty, if I'm not mistaken.

    The thing about outsourcing is that it creates diffuse benefits and concentrated pain, and women are more bothered by concentrated pain than men. You can see this in women's greater support for welfare. Remember, trade restrictions are a subsidy; they are in fact a kind of welfare.

    https://fee.org/articles/tariffs-are-just-another-form-of-welfare/

    I wonder if a woman has ever been caught cheating at chess?

    https://www.chess.com/news/view/igors-rausis-58-under-investigation-of-cheating

    I did a Google search and I found some stories about false accusations, but nothing that ever went anywhere.

    What sort of bizarre psychology would lead a person to do such a thing? I can’t even begin to wrap my mind around it.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    According to the GSS, men are nearly 50% more likely to say cheating on taxes is not wrong and married men are more likely to cheat than married women are (though that means single women are more likely to facilitate cheating than single men are--some will not realize they are doing so, but many, maybe most, are willingly ignorant about that fact, I suspect).
  102. “The thing about outsourcing is that it creates diffuse benefits and concentrated pain, and women are more bothered by concentrated pain than men”

    If I am incorrectly attributing that to you, then excuse me. It was not my intention to mislead.

    However, clearly the contend that women are in some manner by the nature of being women are inclined to be more honest or ethical is unsupportable. It’s mere speculation.

    I think the latest round of hearings confirming Supreme Court Justices sheds light on the propensity of a women’s adherence to truth. But that is anecdotal. Several years ago, and I cannot locate the information this morning, an article on harassment turned the matter of gender and harassment. It turns out is it not gender but position as women in positions of authority were just as inclined to harass as men.

    As with men in general i am not immune to issues with women —

    But I am skeptical that more women in the workplace is going to improve the integrity of the environment merely because they are women.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    However, clearly the contend that women are in some manner by the nature of being women are inclined to be more honest or ethical is unsupportable. It’s mere speculation.
     
    It may be speculation for now, but speculations turn into hypotheses which evidence can confirm or falsify. We'll see. I say the smart money is on men being likelier cheaters, simply based on what we know about differences in recklessness and criminality between genders.

    Now, you can certainly argue that quotas are unjust and immoral no matter what the data say, but men around here routinely argue that this or that statistical disparity between men and women justifies discrimination against us, even to the point of denying us the basic rights of citizenship. I'm guessing they probably won't much like the taste of their own medicine.

    I think people tend to assume that it's only natural for men to make business decisions, but there is nothing natural about the modern corporation. I suspect that women have had more involvement in business decision-making in the past than they do now, just because the economy was tied to the home.
    , @dfordoom

    But I am skeptical that more women in the workplace is going to improve the integrity of the environment merely because they are women.
     
    Women in politics have done nothing to improve the level of integrity. Male politicians are lying treacherous scum. Female politicians are lying treacherous scum.
  103. @EliteCommInc.
    "The thing about outsourcing is that it creates diffuse benefits and concentrated pain, and women are more bothered by concentrated pain than men"


    If I am incorrectly attributing that to you, then excuse me. It was not my intention to mislead.

    However, clearly the contend that women are in some manner by the nature of being women are inclined to be more honest or ethical is unsupportable. It's mere speculation.

    I think the latest round of hearings confirming Supreme Court Justices sheds light on the propensity of a women's adherence to truth. But that is anecdotal. Several years ago, and I cannot locate the information this morning, an article on harassment turned the matter of gender and harassment. It turns out is it not gender but position as women in positions of authority were just as inclined to harass as men.

    As with men in general i am not immune to issues with women ---

    But I am skeptical that more women in the workplace is going to improve the integrity of the environment merely because they are women.

    However, clearly the contend that women are in some manner by the nature of being women are inclined to be more honest or ethical is unsupportable. It’s mere speculation.

    It may be speculation for now, but speculations turn into hypotheses which evidence can confirm or falsify. We’ll see. I say the smart money is on men being likelier cheaters, simply based on what we know about differences in recklessness and criminality between genders.

    Now, you can certainly argue that quotas are unjust and immoral no matter what the data say, but men around here routinely argue that this or that statistical disparity between men and women justifies discrimination against us, even to the point of denying us the basic rights of citizenship. I’m guessing they probably won’t much like the taste of their own medicine.

    I think people tend to assume that it’s only natural for men to make business decisions, but there is nothing natural about the modern corporation. I suspect that women have had more involvement in business decision-making in the past than they do now, just because the economy was tied to the home.

    • Replies: @Talha
    Off topic, but you might enjoy this - very cute and genuine love story. Women and the men that love them...
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxL7g1t_Ra8

    Peace.
    , @dfordoom

    I suspect that women have had more involvement in business decision-making in the past than they do now, just because the economy was tied to the home.
     
    Probably. Women also had much more influence in politics in the past, because politics was not just about money and the economy. It was about trying to make a decent society. Women's influence was indirect but powerful.

    Today politics is about nothing but money and power. And women politicians are as bad as the men.

    You could argue that having more direct involvement in politics has corrupted women.
  104. @Rosie

    However, clearly the contend that women are in some manner by the nature of being women are inclined to be more honest or ethical is unsupportable. It’s mere speculation.
     
    It may be speculation for now, but speculations turn into hypotheses which evidence can confirm or falsify. We'll see. I say the smart money is on men being likelier cheaters, simply based on what we know about differences in recklessness and criminality between genders.

    Now, you can certainly argue that quotas are unjust and immoral no matter what the data say, but men around here routinely argue that this or that statistical disparity between men and women justifies discrimination against us, even to the point of denying us the basic rights of citizenship. I'm guessing they probably won't much like the taste of their own medicine.

    I think people tend to assume that it's only natural for men to make business decisions, but there is nothing natural about the modern corporation. I suspect that women have had more involvement in business decision-making in the past than they do now, just because the economy was tied to the home.

    Off topic, but you might enjoy this – very cute and genuine love story. Women and the men that love them…

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    OMG that was amazing! If he's still alive, I hope he's managing his grief ok. The part about the movies really brought me back. Mr. Rosie and I used to love going at really strange times when nobody else was there so could talk the whole time like the robots on Mystery Science Theater.
  105. It is gratifying that you are willing to admit that it is speculation,

    https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-status-anxiety-of-the-pussyhat-moms/

    It’s not the quotas, it’s the rationale and methodology behind them. And for the record, it accurate that Affirmative Action has benefited whites more than blacks and that margin is substantial.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    , it accurate that Affirmative Action has benefited whites more than blacks and that margin is substantial.
     
    Do not believe this. Data?
    , @Rosie
    LOL @ the pussyhat moms!
  106. @EliteCommInc.
    It is gratifying that you are willing to admit that it is speculation,


    https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-status-anxiety-of-the-pussyhat-moms/


    It's not the quotas, it's the rationale and methodology behind them. And for the record, it accurate that Affirmative Action has benefited whites more than blacks and that margin is substantial.

    , it accurate that Affirmative Action has benefited whites more than blacks and that margin is substantial.

    Do not believe this. Data?

  107. @EliteCommInc.
    It is gratifying that you are willing to admit that it is speculation,


    https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-status-anxiety-of-the-pussyhat-moms/


    It's not the quotas, it's the rationale and methodology behind them. And for the record, it accurate that Affirmative Action has benefited whites more than blacks and that margin is substantial.

    LOL @ the pussyhat moms!

  108. @Talha
    Off topic, but you might enjoy this - very cute and genuine love story. Women and the men that love them...
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxL7g1t_Ra8

    Peace.

    OMG that was amazing! If he’s still alive, I hope he’s managing his grief ok. The part about the movies really brought me back. Mr. Rosie and I used to love going at really strange times when nobody else was there so could talk the whole time like the robots on Mystery Science Theater.

    • Replies: @Talha
    Yeah, I hope the old chap is Ok. He might have died soon after completing that mausoleum for his wife - it might have been the only thing keeping him going.

    I know one of my wife’s grandmas died just a year or so after her grandpa passed away. They were married for like 70 years or something crazy like that. Tough to know what life is like alone when you’ve lived with someone for so long.

    Peace.
  109. @EliteCommInc.
    "The thing about outsourcing is that it creates diffuse benefits and concentrated pain, and women are more bothered by concentrated pain than men"


    If I am incorrectly attributing that to you, then excuse me. It was not my intention to mislead.

    However, clearly the contend that women are in some manner by the nature of being women are inclined to be more honest or ethical is unsupportable. It's mere speculation.

    I think the latest round of hearings confirming Supreme Court Justices sheds light on the propensity of a women's adherence to truth. But that is anecdotal. Several years ago, and I cannot locate the information this morning, an article on harassment turned the matter of gender and harassment. It turns out is it not gender but position as women in positions of authority were just as inclined to harass as men.

    As with men in general i am not immune to issues with women ---

    But I am skeptical that more women in the workplace is going to improve the integrity of the environment merely because they are women.

    But I am skeptical that more women in the workplace is going to improve the integrity of the environment merely because they are women.

    Women in politics have done nothing to improve the level of integrity. Male politicians are lying treacherous scum. Female politicians are lying treacherous scum.

  110. @Rosie

    However, clearly the contend that women are in some manner by the nature of being women are inclined to be more honest or ethical is unsupportable. It’s mere speculation.
     
    It may be speculation for now, but speculations turn into hypotheses which evidence can confirm or falsify. We'll see. I say the smart money is on men being likelier cheaters, simply based on what we know about differences in recklessness and criminality between genders.

    Now, you can certainly argue that quotas are unjust and immoral no matter what the data say, but men around here routinely argue that this or that statistical disparity between men and women justifies discrimination against us, even to the point of denying us the basic rights of citizenship. I'm guessing they probably won't much like the taste of their own medicine.

    I think people tend to assume that it's only natural for men to make business decisions, but there is nothing natural about the modern corporation. I suspect that women have had more involvement in business decision-making in the past than they do now, just because the economy was tied to the home.

    I suspect that women have had more involvement in business decision-making in the past than they do now, just because the economy was tied to the home.

    Probably. Women also had much more influence in politics in the past, because politics was not just about money and the economy. It was about trying to make a decent society. Women’s influence was indirect but powerful.

    Today politics is about nothing but money and power. And women politicians are as bad as the men.

    You could argue that having more direct involvement in politics has corrupted women.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    You could argue that having more direct involvement in politics has corrupted women.
     
    I rather suspect the women who are in politics are self-selected. They got there because they were corrupt; they didn't become corrupt because they got there. In any event, I haven't read this, but it looks interesting.

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268118300933?via%3Dihub

    If women in business are disproportionately put off by demands that they engage in unscrupulous behavior, they will simply wash out.

    https://www.cnn.com/2013/05/15/business/women-work-ethics/index.html
  111. @Rosie
    I wonder if a woman has ever been caught cheating at chess?

    https://www.chess.com/news/view/igors-rausis-58-under-investigation-of-cheating

    I did a Google search and I found some stories about false accusations, but nothing that ever went anywhere.

    What sort of bizarre psychology would lead a person to do such a thing? I can't even begin to wrap my mind around it.

    According to the GSS, men are nearly 50% more likely to say cheating on taxes is not wrong and married men are more likely to cheat than married women are (though that means single women are more likely to facilitate cheating than single men are–some will not realize they are doing so, but many, maybe most, are willingly ignorant about that fact, I suspect).

  112. @dfordoom

    I suspect that women have had more involvement in business decision-making in the past than they do now, just because the economy was tied to the home.
     
    Probably. Women also had much more influence in politics in the past, because politics was not just about money and the economy. It was about trying to make a decent society. Women's influence was indirect but powerful.

    Today politics is about nothing but money and power. And women politicians are as bad as the men.

    You could argue that having more direct involvement in politics has corrupted women.

    You could argue that having more direct involvement in politics has corrupted women.

    I rather suspect the women who are in politics are self-selected. They got there because they were corrupt; they didn’t become corrupt because they got there. In any event, I haven’t read this, but it looks interesting.

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268118300933?via%3Dihub

    If women in business are disproportionately put off by demands that they engage in unscrupulous behavior, they will simply wash out.

    https://www.cnn.com/2013/05/15/business/women-work-ethics/index.html

  113. @Rosie
    OMG that was amazing! If he's still alive, I hope he's managing his grief ok. The part about the movies really brought me back. Mr. Rosie and I used to love going at really strange times when nobody else was there so could talk the whole time like the robots on Mystery Science Theater.

    Yeah, I hope the old chap is Ok. He might have died soon after completing that mausoleum for his wife – it might have been the only thing keeping him going.

    I know one of my wife’s grandmas died just a year or so after her grandpa passed away. They were married for like 70 years or something crazy like that. Tough to know what life is like alone when you’ve lived with someone for so long.

    Peace.

  114. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    One can be an outcast and still be well respected. I'm known to be somewhat strange, but also smart. You should start praying and working out. I hope it helps with your depression (it generally works).

    I’ve found that “slow burn method” (use quoted words as Web search item) both builds muscle strength and avoids both muscle and joint injuries. Requires a gym, and maximum effort, but it _does_ improve mood. The effect during initial training is that you’ve just been in the fight of your life, had to drain quite a few muscles of all their stored energy (which is what the method does), and _you are still alive_! Very good for the morale, and you stop worrying about things for awhile. As far as your non-language-using cortical systems are concerned, you’ve done enough and they stop bothering you.

    Counterinsurgency

  115. The problem I have is that measuring some of these constructs is more difficult than what a poll may reflect.

    Take for example, employment stats the margin of error is several hundred thousand That would shatter the proffered I created x number of jobs angle of any executive. And when talking about employment there’s no indication whether said employment is part time or full time or the avergae income space. It used to be standard that when discussing economic issues such growth and employment one looked to the export numbers, because they reflected a general overview of the overall state, which was linked to private employment growth. That a 3% growth reflected a wide and deep enough economy that indicated employers were or could hire employees to meet the demand of the growth.

    I don’t take WS seriously as a primary indicator and no one should given the financialization of products and the last downturn. Take a serious look at how we measure GDP. That process has not changed much in fifty years and the economy has. And I am not convinced that it was ever an effective measure in the first place. If you can explain to me how cans still on shelves or cars in lots represents a companies value to the economy have at it — unsold goods are not profits they are overhead, unsold products cannot realistically be valued to the economy as they have not been sold. in short GDP assesses the value of goods and services — but that is not a reflection of the economic outlook. it’s a measure of how much product costs – not sold. Whether adjusted to inflation or not, if it “ain’t” sold, its value to the economy is nil adjusted for inflation or not.

    economy defined:

    An economy is the large set of interrelated economic production and consumption activities which aid in determining how scarce resources are allocated.

    https://www.epicsearch.in/search?pno=1&q=economy%20defined

    So when I see surveys about those issues that’s what happens to my brain

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Most people aren't thinking at that level of nuance, though. It is a proxy for whether or not they pay attention to economic news. If they do, they'll know the official unemployment rate is 3.X% and has been there for several years now.
  116. @EliteCommInc.
    The problem I have is that measuring some of these constructs is more difficult than what a poll may reflect.


    Take for example, employment stats the margin of error is several hundred thousand That would shatter the proffered I created x number of jobs angle of any executive. And when talking about employment there's no indication whether said employment is part time or full time or the avergae income space. It used to be standard that when discussing economic issues such growth and employment one looked to the export numbers, because they reflected a general overview of the overall state, which was linked to private employment growth. That a 3% growth reflected a wide and deep enough economy that indicated employers were or could hire employees to meet the demand of the growth.

    I don't take WS seriously as a primary indicator and no one should given the financialization of products and the last downturn. Take a serious look at how we measure GDP. That process has not changed much in fifty years and the economy has. And I am not convinced that it was ever an effective measure in the first place. If you can explain to me how cans still on shelves or cars in lots represents a companies value to the economy have at it -- unsold goods are not profits they are overhead, unsold products cannot realistically be valued to the economy as they have not been sold. in short GDP assesses the value of goods and services -- but that is not a reflection of the economic outlook. it's a measure of how much product costs - not sold. Whether adjusted to inflation or not, if it "ain't" sold, its value to the economy is nil adjusted for inflation or not.

    economy defined:

    An economy is the large set of interrelated economic production and consumption activities which aid in determining how scarce resources are allocated.

    https://www.epicsearch.in/search?pno=1&q=economy%20defined

    So when I see surveys about those issues that's what happens to my brain

    Most people aren’t thinking at that level of nuance, though. It is a proxy for whether or not they pay attention to economic news. If they do, they’ll know the official unemployment rate is 3.X% and has been there for several years now.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    Laugh.


    I agree with the sentiment about most people - sure.
  117. @Audacious Epigone
    Most people aren't thinking at that level of nuance, though. It is a proxy for whether or not they pay attention to economic news. If they do, they'll know the official unemployment rate is 3.X% and has been there for several years now.

    Laugh.

    I agree with the sentiment about most people – sure.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS